Skip to main content

Full text of "Mercury 4"

See other formats


RESULTS  OF  THE  SECOND 
U.S.  MANNED 

SUBORBITAL  SPACE  FLIGHT 
JULY  21,  1961 


For  sale  by  the  iuperintencifiit  of  Documents,  r.S.  Government  Printing  Office,  Wa'hiniston  21,  IXC.  -  Price  4fl  cent* 


FOREWORD 


This  document  presents  the  results  of  the  second  United  States  manned  suborbital 
space  flight.  The  data  and  flight  description  presented  form  a  continuation  of  the 
information  provided  at  an  open  conference  held  under  the  auspices  of  the  National 
Aeronautics  and  Space  Administration,  in  cooperation  with  the  National  Institutes  of 
Health  and  the  National  Academy  of  Sciences,  at  the  U.S.  Department  of  State  Audi- 
torium on  June  6,  1961.  The  papers  presented  herein  generally  parallel  the  presenta- 
tions of  the  first  report  and  were  prepared  by  the  personnel  of  the  NASA  Manned 
Spacecraft  Center  in  collaboration  with  personnel  from  other  government  agencies, 
participating  industry,  and  universities. 


CONTENTS 


FOREWORD    iii 

1.  INTRODUCTION   1 

By  Robert  R.  Gilruth,  Director,  NASA  Manned  Spacecraft  Center. 

2.  SPACECRAFT  AND  FLIGHT  PLAN  FOR  THE  MERCURY- REDSTONE  4 

FLIGHT   3 

By  Jeror  je  B.  Haminack,  Mercury-Redstone  Project  Engineer,   .N  ASA  Manned 
Spacecraft  Center. 

3.  RESULTS  OF  THE  MR  4  PRE  FLIGHT  AND  POSTFL1GHT  MEDICAL  EXAMI- 

NATION CONDUCTED  ON  ASTRONAUT  VIRGIL  I.  GRISSOM   9 


By  William  K.  Douglas,  M.D.,  Astronaut  Flight  Surgeon,  NASA  Manned  Space- 
craft Center;  Carmault  B.  Jackson,  Jr.,  M.D.,  Life  Systems  Division,  NASA 
Manned  Spacecraft  Center:  Ashton  Graybiel,  M.D.,  USN  School  of  Aviation  Medi- 
cine, Pensacola,  Fla.:  George  Ruff,  M.D.,  University  of  Pennsylvania;  Edward  C. 
Knoblcck,  Ph.  D.,  Walter  Reed  Army  Medical  Center;  William  S.  Angerson,  M.D., 
Life  Systems  Division,  NASA  Manned  Spacecraft  Center;  and  C.  Patrick  Laugh- 
lin,  M.D.,  Life  Systems  Division,  N  ASA  Manned  Spacecraft  Center. 
4.  PHYSIOLOGICAL  RESPONSES  OF  THE  ASTRONAUT  IN  THE  MR  4  SPACE 


FLIGHT   15 

By  C.  Patrick  Laughlin,  M.D.,  Life  Systems  Division,  NASA  Manned  Spacecraft 
Center  and  William  S.  Augerson,  M.D.,  Life  Systems  Division,  NASA  Manned 
Spacecraft  Center. 

.).  FLIGHT  SURGEON'S  REPORT  FOR  MERCURY-REDSTONE  MISSIONS  3  AM) 

4   23 

By  William  K.  Douglas,  M.D.,  Astronaut  Fight  Surge'  n,  NASA  Manned  Space- 
craft Center. 

6.  RESULTS  OF  INFLIGHT  PILOT  PERFORMANCE  STUDIED  FOR  THE  MR  I 

FLTGHT   33 

By  Robeit  B.  Voas,  Ph.  D.,  Head,  Training  Office,  NASA  Manned  Spacecraft  Center; 
John  J.  Van  Bockel,  Training  Office,  NASA  Manned  Spacecraft  Center:  Raymond 
G.  ZedeVar,  Training  Office,  NASA  Manned  Spacscraft  Center:  and  Paul  W. 
Hacker.  McDonnell  Aircraft  Corp. 

7.  PILOT'S  FLIGHT  REPORT   47 

By  \  irgil  I.  Grissom,  Astronaut,  NASA  Manned  Spacecraft  Center. 


iv 


1.  INTRODUCTION 


By  Robert  R.  Gilruth,  Director.  NASA  Manned  Spacecraft  Center 


The  second  successful  manned  suborbital  space 
flight  on  July  21,  1961,  in  which  Astronaut  Virgil  1. 
Grissom  was  the  pilot  was  another  step  in  the 
progressive  research,  development,  and  training 
program  leading  to  the  study  of  man's  capabilities 
in  a  space  environment  during  manned  orbital  flight. 
Data  and  operational  experiences  gained  from  this 
flight  were  in  agreement  with  and  supplemented  the 
knowledge  obtained  from  the  first  suborbital  flight 
of  May  5,  1961,  piloted  by  Astronaut  Alan  B. 
S:  ~  d,  Jr. 

wo  recent  manned  suborbital  flights,  coupled 
wiUi  ine  unmanned  research  and  development  flights, 
have  provided  valuable  engineering  and  scientific 
data  on  which  the  program  can  progress.    The  suc- 


cessful active  participation  of  the  pilots,  in  much 
the  same  way  as  in  the  development  and  testing  of 
high  performance  aircraft,  has  greatly  increased  our 
confidence  in  giving  man  a  significant  role  in  future 
space  flight  activities. 

It  is  the  purpose  of  this  report  to  continue  the 
practice  of  providing  data  to  the  scientific  com- 
munity interested  in  activities  of  this  nature.  Brief 
descriptions  are  presented  of  the  Project  Mercury 
spacecraft  and  flight  plan.  Papers  are  provided 
which  parallel  the  presentations  of  data  published 
for  the  first  suborbital  space  flight.  Additional 
information  is  given  relating  to  the  operational 
aspects  of  the  medical  support  activities  for  the  two 
manned  suborbital  space  flights. 


1 


2.  SPACECRAFT  AND  FLIGHT  PLAN  FOR 
THE  MERCURY-REDSTONE  4  FLIGHT 

By  Jerome  B.  HamMACK,  Mercury-Redstone  Project  Engineer,  NASA  Manned  Spacecraft  Center 


Introduction 

The  Mercury  spacecraft  is  described  in  some  de- 
tail in  references  1  and  2.  The  MPH  flight  was 
the  fourth  mission  in  the  Mercury-Redstone  series 
of  flight  tests,  all  of  which  utilized  the  Mercury 
spacecraft.  Each  spacecraft  differed  in  small  de- 
tails, and  the  differences  between  the  MR-3  and  the 
MR-4  spacecraft  are  discussed  herein. 

As  shown  in  figure  2-1,  the  main  configuration 
differences  were  the  addition  to  the  MR-4  space- 


craft of  a  large  viewing  window  and  an  explosively 
actuated  side  hatch. 

Window 

The  addition  of  the  large  viewing  window  in  the 
position  shown  in  the  figure  was  a  result  of  a  change 
requested  by  the  Mercury  astronauts.  This  window 
enables  the  astronaut  to  have  a  greater  viewing  area 
than  the  original  side  port  windows.  The  field  of 
view  of  the  window  is  30°  in  the  horizontal  plane 
and  33°  in  the  vertical. 


HATCH  EXPLOSIVE  IGNITER 
^  (MR-4) 

HATCH  EXTERNAL 
rfXPLOSIVE  CONTROL 
(MR-4)   ; 

ENTRANCE  HATCH 
INTERNAL  RELEASE 
HANDLE  (MR-3) 

EXTERNAL  RELEASE 
HANDLE  SOCKET 
(MR-3) 


ENTRANCE  HATCH 

LOWER  WINDOW 
(MR-3) 


RSCS  RATE  DAMPER  BOX 
(MR-4) 

EXTERNAL  RELEASE  HANDLE 
(STOWED  POSITION) 

(MR-3)  — 


UPPER  WINDOW 
(MR-3) 


MR-4  WINDOW 

HATCH  INTERNAL 
EXPLOSIVE  CONTROL 
(MR-4) 

-  CABIN  AIR 
INLET  VALVE 
.  (MR-4) 


CABIN  AIR  INLET  VALVE 
(MR-3) 


Figure  2-1.  Configuration  differences  between  MR-3  and  MR-4  spacecraft. 


3 


The  window  is  composed  of  an  outer  panel  of 
0.35-inch-thick  Vycor  glass  and  a  3-layer  inner 
panel.  The  top  layer  of  this  inner  panel  is  0.17-inch- 
thick  Vycor  glass  and  the  other  two  layers  are  0.34- 
inch-thick  tempered  glass.  The  Vycor  glass  panels 
will  withstand  temperat  ares  in  the  range  of  1,500° 
to  1.800°  F.  The  inner  layers  of  tempered  glass 
will  withstand  the  cabin-pressure  differences.  Mag- 
nesium fluoride  coatings  were  applied  to  reduce 
glare.  Although  not  installed  for  the  MR-4  flight, 
a  removable  polaroid  filter  to  reduce  glare  further 
and  a  red  filter  for  night  adaption  are  available  for 
the  window  . 

Side  Hatch 

The  explosively  actuated  side  hatch  was  used  for 
the  first  time  on  the  MR-4  flight.  The  mechanically 
operated  side  hatch  on  :he  MR-3  spacecraft  was  in 
the  same  location  and  o :  the  same  size,  but  was  con- 
siderably heavier  (69  pounds  as  installed  rather 
than  23  pounds) . 

The  explosively  actuated  hatch  utilizes  an  ex- 
plosive charge  to  fracture  the  attaching  bolts  and 
thus  separate  the  hatch  from  the  spacecraft.  Seventy 
Vi-inch  titanium  bolts  secure  the  hatch  to  the  door- 
sill.  A  0.06-inch-diameter  hole  is  drilled  in  each 
bolt  to  provide  a  weak  point.  A  mild  detonating 
fuse  ( MDF  I  is  installed  in  a  channel  between  an 
inner  and  outer  seal  around  the  periphery  of  the 
hatch.  When  the  MDF  is  ignited,  the  resulting  gas 
pressure  between  the  inner  and  outer  seal  causes 
the  bolts  to  fail  in  tension. 

The  MDF  is  ignited  by  a  manually  operated  ig- 
niter that  requires  an  actuation  force  of  around  5 
pounds,  after  removal  of  a  safety  pin.  The  igniter 
can  be  operated  externally  by  an  attached  lanyard, 
in  which  case  a  force  jf  at  least  40  pounds  is  re- 
quired in  order  to  shear  the  safety  pin. 

Other  differences  be:ween  the  MR-3  spacecraft 
and  the  MR-4  spacecraft,  not  visible  in  figure  2-1, 
include:  (a I  redesigned  clamp-ring  covers,  (b) 
changed  instrument  paiel,  and  (c)  the  incorpora- 
tion of  a  rate  command  control  system. 

Clamp-Ring  Covers 

The  fairings  around  the  explosive  bolts  were 
changed  to  a  more  streamlined  shape  from  the  orig- 
inal rectangular  shape  to  reduce  buffeting.  Also,  the 
upper  part  of  the  fairings  were  hinged  so  that  at 
separation  they  would  flip  off  rather  than  slide 
dow7n.  There  was  evidence  that  on  a  previous  Little 
Joe-Mercury  flight,  the  umbilical  connections  had 


MR-4 


Figure  2-2.  Clamp-ring  covers  for  MR-3  and  MR-4 
spacecraft. 

been  damaged  by  this  sliding  action.  Figure  2-2 
shows  the  differences  between  the  MR-3  and  MR^l 
covers. 

Instrument  Panel 

A  comparison  between  the  MR4  spacecraft  in- 
strument panel,  shown  in  figure  2-3,  and  the  MR-3 
panel,  presented  in  reference  1,  reveals  that  the  dif- 
ferences were  mainly  the  rearrangement  of  controls 
and  indicators  and  the  addition  of  an  earth-path 
indicator.  The  earth-path  indicator  was  inoperative 
for  the  MR— 4  flight,  however. 

Rate  Stabilization  and  Control  Systen. 

The  major  difference  between  the  stabilization 
and  control  systems  of  the  MR— 3  and  MR-4  space- 
craft was  the  addition  to  the  MR— 4  spacecraft  of  a 
rate  command  control  system  which  operated  in 
connection  with  the  manual  reaction  control  system. 
The  rate  stabilization  and  control  system  (RSCS) 
senses  and  commands  spacecraft  rates  rather  than 
attitudes.  The  system  damps  to  the  commanded 
rate  to  within  +3  deg/sec.  Without  manual  com- 
mand, it  damps  to  zero  rate  within  ±3  deg/sec. 

Prelaunch  Preparations 

The  prelaunch  preparation  period  was  essentially 
the  same  as  for  the  MR— 3  mission.  A  brief  descrip- 
tion of  the  activity  during  this  period  follows. 

Astronaut 

Prior  to  launch  of  the  MR^l  spacecraft,  the  as- 
signed pilot  for  the  mission  started  an  intense  train- 
ing routine  at  Cape  Canaveral,  Fla.,  and  at  the 
NASA  Manned   Spacecraft  Center,  Langlev  *ir 


4 


Figure  2-3.  Main  instrument  panel  and  consoles  for  MR-4  spacecraft. 


Force  Base,  Va.,  to  familiarize  himself  with  the 
various  details  of  the  spacecraft  systems  and  to 
sharpen  his  reactions  to  various  situations.  During 
this  period,  the  pilot  participated  in  a  centrifuge 
training  program  in  which  17  Mercury  acceleration 
profiles  were  run.  The  pilot  took  part  in  environ- 
ir  control  system  tests,  communication  tests, 
r  control  system  tests;  obtained  100  simu- 

lateu  missions  on  the  procedures  trainer:  conducted 
36  simulated  missions  on  the  air-lubricated  free- 
attitude  (ALFA)  trainer;  and  practiced  insertion 
exercises  and  R.F  tests  in  which  the  pilot  and  space- 
craft were  exercised  in  a  simulated  count  through 
lift  off.  On  July  21,  1961,  after  two  delays  in  the 
launch  date,  the  pilot  was  prepared  and  inserted  in 
the  spacecraft  at  3:58  a.m.  e.s.t.  Launch  occurred 
at  7:20  a.m.  e.s.t. 

Mercury  Control  Center 

The  Mercury  Control  Center  provided  excellent 
support  for  the  MR^l  mission.  Numerous  simu- 
lated flights  were  run  prior  to  launching  which  uti- 
lized the  flight  astronauts  in  the  procedures  trainer 
and  the  personnel  of  the  flight  control  center  and 
network. 

Spacecraft 

The  spacecraft  was  delivered  to  Hangar  "S"  at 
Cape  Canaveral,  Fla.,  on  March  7,  1961.  Upon  de- 
livery, the  instrumentation  and  selected  items  of 
t>         imunication  system  were  removed  from  the 


spacecraft  for  bench  testing.  After  reinstallation  of 
the  components,  the  systems  tests  proceeded  as 
scheduled  with  only  slight  interruptions  for  work 
periods.  Those  tests  required  a  total  of  33  days, 
during  which  the  electrical,  sequential,  instrumenta- 
tion, communication,  environmental,  reaction-con- 
trol, and  stabilization  and  control  systems  were 
individually  tested.  After  systems  tests,  a  short 
work  period  was  required  to  install  the  landing-im- 
pact bag.  A  simulated  flight  was  then  run  on  the 
spacecraft  which  was  followed  by  installation  of 
parachutes  and  pyrotechnics,  weighed  and  balanced, 
and  delivered  to  the  launch  complex  for  mating  with 
the  booster.  Twenty-one  days  were  spent  on  the 
launching  pad  during  which  the  spacecraft  and 
booster  systems  were  checked  both  separately  and 
as  a  unit.  After  the  systems  checks  were  completed, 
a  spacecraft — launch-vehicle  simulated  flight  was 
performed.  The  spacecraft — launch-vehicle  com- 
bination was  then  ready  for  launch.  A  period  of 
136  days  elapsed  between  delivery  of  the  spacecraft 
to  Cape  Canaveral,  Fla.,  and  its  successful  launch. 
The  MR-4,  launch  occurred  on  July  21,  1961,  47 
days  after  the  first  manned  ballistic  flight  bv  Astro- 
naut Alan  B.  Shepard,  Jr. 

Launch  Vehicle 

The  launch-vehicle  system  checks  and  prepara- 
tions proceeded  as  scheduled  with  only  minor  mal- 
functions which  caused  no  delays  in  the  schedule. 
During  the  split  countdown  on  the  launching  pad, 


5 


the  launch-vehicle  countdown  proceeded  smoothly 
with  no  hold  periods  chargeable  to  the  launch-vehicle 
systems. 

Countdown 

The  MR-4  spacecraft  was  launched  at  7:20  a.m. 
e.s.t.  on  July  21,  1961  (fig.  2-4).  The  launch  was 
originally  scheduled  for  July  18.  1961,  but  was 
rescheduled  to  July  19,  1961,  because  of  unfavorable 
weather  conditions.    The  launch  attempt  of  July  19. 


Figure  2-4.  Launch  of  the  Mercury-Redstone  4  from  Cape 
Canaveral  launch  site  on  July  21,  1961. 


1961,  was  canceled  at  T— 10  minutes  as  a  result  of 
continued  unfavorable  weather.  The  launch  was 
then  rescheduled  for  July  21,  1961.  The  first  half 
of  the  split  launch  countdown  was  begun  at  6 :00  a.m. 
e.s.t.  on  July  20.  1961.  at  T  — 640  minutes.  Space- 
craft preparation  proceeded  normally  through  the 
12-hour  planned  hold  period  for  hydrogen  peroxide 
and  pyrotechnic  servicing.  Evaluation  of  the 
weather  at  this  time  affirmed  favorable  launch  condi- 
tions. The  second  halt  of  the  countdown  was  there- 
fore begun  at  2:30  a.m.  e.s.t.  on  July  20.  1961.  At 
T— 180  minutes,  prior  to  adding  liquid  oxygen  to 
the  launch  vehicle,  a  planned  1-hour  hold  was  called 
for  another  weather  evaluation.  The  weather 
evaluation  was  favorable  and  the  countdown  pro- 


ceeded from  T—  180  minutes  at  3:00  a.m.  e.s.t.  No 
further  delays  in  the  countdown  were  encoi'^+ered 
until  T  — 45  minutes.  A  30-minute  hold  w  ;d 
at  this  time  to  install  a  misalined  hatch  L  At 
T  — 30  minutes,  a  9-minute  hold  was  required  to  turn 
off  the  pad  searchlights  which  interfere  with  launch- 
vehicle  telemetry  during  launch.  At  T—  15  minutes, 
a  41-minute  hold  was  required  to  await  better  cloud 
conditions.  The  count  then  proceeded  from  T— 15 
until  lift-off. 

The  pilot  was  in  the  spacecraft  3  hours  and  22 
minutes  prior  to  launch. 

Flight  Description 

The  MR-4-  flight  plan  was  very  much  the  same  as 
that  for  the  MR-3.  The  flight  profile  is  shown  in 
figure  2-5.  As  shown,  the  range  was  262.5  nautical 
miles,  the  maximum  altitude  was  102.8  nautical 
miles,  and  the  period  of  weightlessness  lasted  for 
approximately  5  minutes. 

The  sequence  of  events  was  as  follows : 

At  T  — 35  seconds,  the  spacecraft  umbilical  was 
pulled  and  the  periscope  was  retracted.  During 
the  boosted  phase  of  flight,  the  flight-path  angle  was 
controlled  bv  the  launch-vehicle  control  system. 
Launch-vehicle  cutoff  occurred  at  T  +  2  minutes  23 
seconds,  at  which  time  the  escape  tower  clamp  ring 
was  released,  and  escape  tower  was  rele.  '-d_  by 
firing  the  escape  and  tower  jettison  rocke'  m 
seconds  later,  the  spacecraft-to-launcl  ie 
adapter  clamp  ring  was  separated,  and  the  posi grade 
rockets  fired  to  separate  the  spacecraft  from  the 
launch  vehicle.  The  periscope  was  extended;  the 
automatic  stabilization  and  control  system  provided 
5  seconds  of  rate  damping,  followed  bv  spacecraft 
turnaround.  It  then  oriented  the  spacecraft  to  orbit 
attitude  of  —34°. 

Retrosequence  was  initiated  by  timer  at  T  +  4 
minutes  46  seconds,  which  was  30  seconds  prior  to 
the  spacecraft  reaching  its  apogee. 

The  astronaut  assumed  control  of  spacecraft  atti- 
tude at  T  +  3  minutes  5  seconds  and  controlled  the 
spacecraft  by  the  manual  proportional  control  system 
to  T  +  5  minutes  43  seconds.  He  initiated  firing  of 
the  retrorockets  at  T  — 5  minutes  10  seconds.  From 
T—  5  minutes  43  seconds,  he  controlled  the  space- 
craft by  the  manual  rate  command  system  through 
reentry.  The  retrorocket  package  was  jettisoned  at 
T  +  6  minutes  7  seconds.  The  drogue  parachute 
was  deployed  at  T  +  9  minutes  41  seconds,  and  main 
parachute,  at  T+10  minutes  14  seconds.  Landing 
occurred  at  T— 15  minutes  37  seconds. 


6 


TIKE  REFERENCE  -  MIN:SEC 


A  comparison  of  the  flight  parameters  of  MR-4 
and  MR-3  spacecraft,  listed  in  table  2-1,  shows  that 
both  flights  provided  similar  conditions. 


Figure  2-5.  Flight  profile  for  MrM. 

ACCELERATION, 
q  UNITS 
I2r 


Table  2-1. — Comparison  of  Flight  Parameters  for 
MR-3  and  MR-4  Spacecraft 


_  Parameter 

MR  3 

MR-4 

flight 

flight 

263.  1 

262.5 

Maximum  altitude,  nautical  miles. . 

101.  2 

102.8 

Maximum  exit  dynamic  pressure, 

lb/sq  ft  

586.  0 

605.5 

Maximum    exit    longitudinal  load 

6.3 

6.3 

Maximum      reentry  longitudinal 

11.0 

11.  1 

Period  of  weightlessness,  min:sec  .  . 

5:04 

5:00 

6,414 

6,618 

Space-fixed  velocity,  ft /sec  

7,388 

7,580 

The  acceleration  time  history  occurring  during  the 
MR-4  flight  is  shown  in  figure  2—6  and  is  very  sim- 
ilar to  that  of  the  MR-3  flight  fref.  1). 

The  recovery-force  deployment  and  spacecraft 
landing  point  are  shown  in  figure  2-7.  The  space- 
craft was  lost  during  the  postlanding  recovery  period 
as  a  result  of  premature  actuation  of  the  explosively 
actuated  side  egress  hatch.  The  astronaut  egressed 
from  the  spacecraft  immediately  after  hatch  actua- 
tion and  was  retrieved  after  being  in  the  water  for 
alv>"f  3  to  4  minutes. 


10 
8 
6 
4 
2 


,-LAUNCH- 
\  VEHICLE 
\  CUTOFF 
2MIN,  23  SEC 


^ 


REENTRY 


^ETROFIRE 
'    Ai  A 


T-MAIN  PARACHUTE 
DEPLOYMENT 


J 


0       2     4     6      8     10     12  14 
TIME,  MIN 

Figure  2-6.  Acceleration  time  history  for  MR^  flight. 

The  spacecraft  and  its  systems  performed  well  on 
the  MR-4  flight:  the  major  difficulty  was  the  as  yet 
unexplained  premature  separation  of  the  side  egress 
hatch.  A  minor  control  problem  was  noted  in  that, 
design  turning  rates  were  not  achieved  with  full  stick 
deflection.  This  problem  is  believed  to  be  due  to 
control  linkage  rigging. 


SPACECRAFT 
"TTIHI  LANDING 
POINT 


Figure  2-7.  Chart  of  recovery  operations. 


7 


References 

1.  Anon.:  Proceedings  oj  Conference  on  Results  oj  the  First  U.S.  Manned  Suborbital  Space  Flight.    NASA,  ,t. 

Health,  and  Nat.  Acad  Sci.,  June  6.  1961. 

2.  Hammack,  Jerome  B.,  End  Heberlic,  Jack  C:  The  Mercury-Redstone  Program.     | Preprint]  2238-61.  American  Kocket 

Soc.,  Oct.  1961. 


8 


RESULTS  OF  THE  MR-4  PREFLIGHT  AND  POSTFLIGHT 
MEuICAL  EXAMINATION   CONDUCTED  ON  ASTRONAUT  VIRGIL 

I.  GRISSOM 

By  William  K.  Douglas,  M.D.,  Astronaut  Flight  Surgeon,  NASA  Manned  Spacecraft  Center;  Carmault 
B.  Jackson,  Jr.,  M.D.,  Life  Systems  Division,  NASA  Manned  Spacecraft  Center;  Ashton  Graybiel, 
M.D.,  USN  School  of  Aviation  Medicine,  Pensacola,  Fla.;  George  Ruff,  M.D.,  University  of  Penn- 
sylvania; Edward  C.  Knoblock,  Ph.  D.,  Walter  Reed  Army  Medical  Center;  William  S.  Augerson, 
M.D.,  Life  Systems  Division,  NASA  Manned  Spacecraft  Center;  and  C.  Patrick  Laughlin,  M.D., 
Life  Systems  Division,  NASA  Manned  Spacecraft  Center 


This  paper  presents  the  results  of  the  clinical 
and  biochemical  examinations  conducted  on  Astro- 
naut Virgil  I.  Grissom  prior  to  and  following 
the  MR^l  mission.  The  objectives  of  such  an 
examination  program  were  presented  in  the  MR-3 
report  on  Astronaut  Alan  B,  Shepard,  Jr.  (ref.  1). 
Basically,  the  health  of  the  astronaut  before  and 
after  the  space  flight  was  assessed  and  any  altera- 
tions were  sought  out  that  might  have  resulted  from 
the  stresses  imposed  by  the  space  flight.  Similar 
medical  and  biochemical  examinations  had  been  ac- 
complished during  the  Mercury-Redstone  centrifuge 
training  sessions  and  provided  data  of  comparative 
value. 

J^-is  important  to  point  out  the  limitations  in 
<  ing  examination  findings  with  specific  flight 

si  a.  The  last  preflight  examination  was  per- 
formed approximately  5  hours  before  lift-off  and 
the  final  postflight  examination  3  hours  after  space- 
craft landing.  The  strenuous  effort  by  Astronaut 
Grissom  during  his  recovery  from  the  ocean  may 
well  have  produced  changes  which  overshadowed 
any  flight  induced  effects. 

Astronaut  Grissom  was  examined  several  times 
in  the  preflight  period  as  two  launch  attempts  were 
canceled  before  the  actual  flight  on  July  21,  1961. 
The  initial  clinical  and  biochemical  examinations 
were  performed  on  July  17,  1961,  at  which  time 
questioning  disclosed  no  subjective  complaints. 
Positive  physical  findings  were  limited  to  shotty, 
nontender  inguinal  and  axillary  adenopathy,  and 
mild  pharyngeal  lymphoid  hyperplasia.  The  skin  at 
the  lower  sternal  electrode  placement  site  exhibited 
a  well  circumscribed  area  (1  cm  in  diameter)  of 
eruption.  This  lesion  appeared  to  consist  of  about 
8  to  10  small  pustules  arising  from  hair  follicles. 
Upon  closer  examination  of  this  eruption  in  August 
1961,  it  became  apparent  that  the  pustules  seen  in 
T         id,  by  this  later  date,  become  inclusion  cysts. 


Culture  of  these  lesions  in  August  1961  was  sterile. 
These  lesions  were  attributed  to  the  use  of  electrode 
paste  and  were  also  noted  on  the  pilot  of  MR-3 
flight. 

The  preflight  examination  on  July  21,  1961,  is 
reported  in  detail.  A  feeling  of  mild  "sore  throat" 
was  reported;  otherwise  the  body  systems  review 
was  negative.  Psychiatric  examination  reported  "no 
evidence  of  overt  anxiety,  that  Astronaut  Grissom 
explained  that  he  was  aware  of  the  dangers  of  flight, 
but  saw  no  gain  in  worrying  about  them."  In  fact, 
"he  felt  somewhat  tired,  and  was  less  concerned 
about  anxiety  than  about  being  sufficiently  alert 
to  do  a  good  job."  At  the  physical  examination 
the  vital  signs  ( table  3-1 )  were  an  oral  temperature 
of  97.8C  F,  blood  pressure  of  128/75  (right  arm 
sitting),  weight  of  150.5  lb,  pulse  rate  of  68,  and 
respiration  rate  of  12.  Inspection  of  the  skin  re- 
vealed there  were  small  pustules  at  the  site  of  the 
lower  sternal  electrode,  but  it  was  otherwise  clear. 
The  same  shotty  nontender  inguinal  and  axillary 
nodes  were  felt.  Eye,  ear,  nose,  and  mouth  examina- 
tion was  negative.  There  was  slight  to  moderate 
oropharyngeal  lymphoid  hyperplasia.  The  trachea 
was  midline,  the  neck  normally  flexible,  and  the 
thyroid  gland  unremarkable.  The  lungs  were  clear 
to  percussion  and  auscultation  throughout.  Heart 
sounds  were  of  normal  quality,  the  rhythm  was 
regular,  and  the  heart  was  not  enlarged  to  percus- 
sion. Palpitation  of  the  abdomen  revealed  no 
spasm,  tenderness,  or  abnormal  masses.  The  geni- 
talia, back,  and  extremities  were  normal.  Calf  and 
thigh  measurements  were: 


Calf 

Thigh 

Right  

Left  

15%  in.     I       21  in. 

15?/8  in.      j.      20?4  in. 

i 

9 


Neurological  examination  revealed  no  abnormality. 
An  electroencephalogram,  electrocardiogram,  and 
chest  X-ray  were  normal,  unchanged  from  Septem- 
ber 1960.  Vital  capacity  standing,  measured  with 
a  bellows  spirometer,  was  5.0  liters.  Analysis  of 
the  urine  and  blood  (tables  3-II  and  3— III )  re- 
vealed no  abnormality. 

As  with  the  MR-3  flight,  members  of  the  medical 
examining  team  were  eilher  transported  to  the  Grand 
Bahama  Island  debriefing  site  a  day  prior  to  launch 
or  flew  down  immediately  after  launch. 

The  initial  postfligh:  medical  examination  was 
conducted  immediately  after  Astronaut  Grissom  ar- 
rived aboard  the  recovery  aircraft  carrier,  USS 
Randolph,  approximately  15  minutes  after  space- 
craft landing  in  the  ocean.  The  examination  was 
conducted  by  the  same  physicians  who  examined 
Astronaut  Shepard  aboard  the  USS  Lake  Champlain. 

The  findings  disclosed  vital  signs  of  rectal  tem- 
perature of  100.4°  F;  pulse  rate  from  160  initially 
to  104  (supine  at  end  of  examination)  :  blood  pres- 
sure of  120/85  LA  sitting.  110/88  standing,  and 
118/82  supine:  weight  of  147.2  pounds,  and  respira- 
tory rate  of  28.  On  general  inspection,  the  astro- 
naut appeared  tired  and  was  breathing  rapidly;  his 
skin  was  warm  and  moist.  Eye,  ear,  nose,  and 
throat  examination  repealed  slight  edema  of  the 
mucosa  of  the  left  nasal  cavity  and  no  other  ab- 
normalities. Chest  examination  showed  no  signs 
of  atelectasis  although  there  was  a  high  noise  level 
in  the  examining  room.  No  rales  were  heard  and 
the  pilot  showed  no  tendency  to  cough.  Vital  ca- 
pacity measured  with  a  bellows  spirometer  while 
still  in  suit  was  4.5  liters. 

Peripheral  pulses  were  described  as  normal  and 
a  left  axillary  node  was  noted.  The  abdomen  was 
soft  with  normal  bowel  sounds. 

The  pilot  voided  three  times  without  fluid  intake. 
The  limited  neurological  examination  disclosed  no 
abnormalities.  Extremity  measurements  were  as 
follows : 


Calf  Thigh 


Right   lSK  in.     !      20Vi  in. 

Left   15K  in.     ,      20%  in. 


After  a  short  nap  and  breakfast  he  was  flown  to 
Grand  Bahama  Island,  arriving  approximately  3 
hours  after  spacecraft  landing.  His  general  appear- 
ance was  much  improved.    Vital  signs  were  recorded 


as  a  temperature  of  98.4  (oral)  ;  blood  pressure  of 
125/85  sitting.  124/82  standing,  122/78  ~e; 
pulse  rate  of  90;  and  weight  of  147.5  pound. 

Ophthalmological  examination  approximately  6 
hours  postflight  showed  slight  injection  of  the  con- 
junctiva of  the  left  eye.  These  findings,  as  well  as 
nasal  mucosa  edema,  were  ascribed  to  salt  water 
exposure.  The  lungs  remained  clear  to  percussion 
and  auscultation.  The  abdomen,  genitalia,  back,  and 
extremities  were  normal.  Neurological  examination 
revealed  "changes  consistent  with  muscular  fatigue 
in  a  normal  individual."  The  electroencephalogram, 
electrocardiogram,  and  chest  X-ray  revealed  no 
abnormality.  Vital  capacity  measurement  was  4.8 
and  4.9  liters.  An  exercise  tolerance  test  (Harvard 
step)  was  within  control  range. 

Additional  examinations  in  the  ensuing  48  hours 
revealed  no  changes  when  compared  with  preflight 
studies. 

The  vital  signs  are  summarized  in  table  3-1.  Re- 
sults of  the  biochemical  determination  are  presented 
in  tables  3— II  to  3— V.  Control  data  from  Redstone 
centrifuge  experience  are  included. 

Table  3-VI  shows  comparisons  between  clinical 
observations  from  single  simulated  Redstone  mis- 
sions conducted  at  the  Johnsville  human  centrifuge 
I  with  a  5-psia  100-percent  oxvgen  environment)  and 
the  MR— 4  flight.  The  examinations  were  m?  1 "  be- 
fore and  after  the  simulation,  at  times  compa  :> 
those  in  the  actual  flight. 

An  evaluation  of  the  clinical  and  biochemical 
studies  permits  the  following  conclusions: 

(a)  Astronaut  Grissom  was  in  good  health  prior 
to  and  following  his  MR-4  flight.  The  immediate 
postflight  examination  revealed  changes  consistent 
with  general  fatigue  and  sea  water  exposure. 

(b)  Clinical  examination  disclosed  no  specific 
functional  derangement  that  could  be  attributed  to 
the  spaceflight  stresses. 

(c)  No  specific  biochemical  alteration  occurred 
that  could  be  attributed  to  a  spaceflight  stress  effect. 

Acknowledgments — Special  acknowledgment  is 
paid  to  Drs.  Robert  C.  Lanning  fUSN)  and  Jerome 
Strong  (USA)  who  conducted  the  physical  exami- 
nation aboard  the  USS  Randolph;  Dr.  James  F. 
Culver  of  the  USAF  School  of  Aviation  Medicine, 
who  performed  the  ophthalmologic  examinations; 
Dr.  Phillip  Cox,  Andrews  Air  Force  Base  Hospital, 
who  participated  in  the  physical  examinations ;  and 
Dr.  Francis  Kruse  of  the  Lackland  Air  Force  Base 
Hospital,  who  performed  the  neurological  exami- 
nations.   Dr.  Walter  Frajola  of  Ohio  State  I 


10 


sity  made  some  of  the  biochemical  determinations,  Manned  Spacecraft  Center,  collected  and  processed 
ar       Ns  Rita  Rapp,  Life  Systems  Division,  NASA       the  biochemical  specimens. 


Reference 

1.  Jackson,  Carmault  B.,  Jr.,  Douglas,  William  K.,  et  al.:  Results  of  Preflight  and  Postflight  Medico!  Examinations. 
Proc.  Conf.  on  Results  of  the  First  U.S.  Manned  Suborbital  Space  Flight,  NASA,  Nat.  Inst.  Health,  and  Nat.  Acad.  Sci. 
June  6,  1961,  pp.  31-36. 

Bibliography 

Glucose : 

Nelson,  M. :  Photometric  Adaptation  of  Somogyi  Method  for  Determination  of  Glucose.    Jour.  Biol.  Chem.,  vol.  153, 
1944,  pp.  375-380. 
Total  protein,  albumin: 

Cohn,  C,  and  Wolfson,  W.  G. :  Studies  in  Serum  Proteins.    I — The  Chemical  Estimation  of  Albumin  and  of  the 

Globulin  Fractions  in  Serum.    Jour.  Lab.  Clin.  Med.,  vol.  32,  1947,  pp.  1203-1207. 
Gornall,  A.  G.,  Bahdawill,  C.  J.,  and  David,  M.  M. :  Determination  of  Serum  Proteins  by  Means  of  the  Biuret 

Reaction.    Jour.  Biol.  Chem.,  vol.  177,  1949,  pp.  751-766. 
Urea  nitrogen: 

Gentzkow,  C.  J.,  and  Masen,  J.  M. :  An  Accurate  Method  for  the  Determination  of  Blood  Urea  Nitrogen  by  Direct 
Nesslerization.    Jour.  Biol.  Chem.,  vol.  143,  1942,  pp.  531-544. 
Calcium: 

Diehl,  H.,  and  Ellincboe,  J.  L. :  Indicator  for  Titration  of  Calcium  in  Presence  of  Magnesium  With  Disodium  Dihy- 
drogen  Ethylene  Diaminetetraacetate.    Anal.  Chem.,  vol.  28,  1956,  pp.  882-884. 
Chloride : 

Schales,  0.,  and  Schales,  S.  S. :  A  Simple  and  Accurate  Method  for  the  Determination  of  Chloride  in  Biological 
Fluids.    Jour.  Biol.  Chem.,  vol.  140,  1941,  pp.  879-884. 
Epinephrine  and  norepinephrine: 

Weil-Malherbe,  H.,  and  Bone,  A.  D.:  The  Adrenergic  Amines  of  Human  Blood.    Lancet,  vol.  264,  1953,  pp.  974^977. 

Gray,  I.  Young,  J.  G.,  Keegan,  J.  F.,  Meheman,  B.,  and  Southerland,  E.  W. :  Adrenaline  and  Norepinephrine  Con- 
centration, in  Plasma  of  Humans  and  Rats.    Clin.  Chem.,  vol.  3,  1957,  pp.  239-248. 
Sodium  potassium  by  flame  photometry: 

Bebkman  S.,  Henhy,  R.  J.,  Golub,  O.  J.,  and  Seagalove,  M. :  Tungstic  Acid  Precipitation  of  Blood  Proteins.  Jour. 

"  ^ol.  Chem.,  vol.  206,  1954,  pp.  937-943. 
V  ndelic  acid: 

derman.  F.  W„  Jr.,  et  al.:  A  Method  for  the  Determination   of  3-Methoxy4-Hydroxymandelic  Acid  ("Vanil- 
mandelic  Acid")  for  the  Diagnosis  of  Pheochromocytoma.    Am.  Jour.  Clin.  Pathol.,  vol.  34,  1960,  pp.  293-312. 


Table  3-1. — Vital  Signs 


Preflight 


Postflight 


-7  hr 
(Cape  Canaveral) 


+  30  min 
(Shipboard) 


Body  weight  nude  (post  voiding)  j  150  lb  8  oz   147  lb  3  oz  .  . 

Temperature,   °F   97.8  (oral)   100.4  (rectal) . 

Pulse  per  min   68   160  to  104. 


28. 


Respiration  per  min   12  

Blood  pressure,  mm  Hg:  I 

Sitting  j  128/75  j  120/85. 

Standing    !  110/88. 

Supine  j  ;  118/82. 

Vital  capacity  (bellows  spirometer),  liters.  .  .  .    5.0  ;  4.5.  .  .  . 


+  2  hr 

(Grand  Bahama 
Island) 


147  lb  8  oz 
98.4  (oral) 
90 
14 

125/85 

124/82 

122/78 

4.8 

4.9 


11 


Table  3— II. — -Results  of  Urine  Tests 


Centrifuge 

MR-4  flight 

Postrun 

Preflight 

Post  flight 

Pre- 

run 

During 

+  30 

+  2  hr 

-6  hr 

count- 

+ 1  hr 

+  3  hr 

+  6  hr 

+  13  hr 

+  24  hr 

min 

down 

hr  1 

Sample  volume,  ml.  . . 

125 

185 



470 

135 

185 

110 

300 

100 

475 

135 

315 

1.  023 

1.005 

1.  011 

1.020 

1.011 

1.  010 

1.022 

1.020 

1.022 

1.025 

1.015 

Albumin  

Neg. 

Neg. 

Neg, 

Neg. 

Neg. 

Neg. 

Neg. 

Neg. 

IN  eg. 

Neg. 

Neg. 

Neg. 

Neg. 

Neg. 

Neg. 

Neg. 

Neg. 

Neg. 

Neg. 

Neg. 

Neg. 

Neg. 

Ketones  

Neg. 

Neg. 

Neg. 

Neg. 

Neg. 

Neg. 

Neg. 

Neg. 

Neg. 

Neg. 

Neg. 

Neg. 

Neg. 

Neg. 

Neg. 

Neg. 

Neg. 

Neg. 

Neg. 

Neg. 

Neg. 

Neg. 

pH  

6.4 

6.2 

6.2 

6.6 

6.8 

6.4 

6.  0 

6.0 

6.0 

6.0 

6.8 

130 

28 

79 

142 

76 

70 

122 

128 

140 

114 

140 

K,  mEq/L  

62 

28 

39 

35 

18 

19 

37 

39 

25 

49 

71 

CI,  mEq/L  

55 

68 

130 

65 

111 

68 

69 

178 

Microscopic  examina- 

tion   

N 

o  formed  element 

s  observed 

Breakfast  eaten  follow  ing  previous  sample. 


Table  3— III. — Peripheral  Blood  Findings 


Preflight 

Postflight 

—  3  days 

+  1  hr 

+  5  hr 

+  49  ' 

Hematocrit,  percent  

42.5 

42.2 

42.5 

42.  7 

Hemoglobin,1  g  

14.1 

14.4 

14.6 

14.2 

White  blood  cells,  per  mm3  

6,500 

7, 200 

9,  100 

6,  700 

Red  blood  cells,  millions/mm'  

4.81 

4.  75 

4.  67 

4.  71 

Differential  blood  count : 

Lymphocytes,  percent  

46 

40 

29 

35 

Neutrophiles,  percent  

46 

54 

66 

59 

Band  cells,  percent   

Monocytes,  percent  

5 

4 

3 

4 

1 

2 

2 

2 

Basophiles,  percent  

2 

0 

0 

0 

Acid  Hematin  met  hoc* 


12 


Table  3-IV. — Blood  Chemistry  Findings 


r 


Sodium  (serum),  mEq/L.  .  . 
Potassium  (serum),  mEq/L. 

Chloride,  mEq/L  

Protein,  total  

Albumin,  g/100  ml  

Globulin,  g; 100  ml  

Glucose,  mg/100  ml  

Epinephrine,*  Mg/L  

Norepinephrine, 2  ^g/L  

1  Normal  values:  0.  0  to  0.  4  pglL 

2  Normal  values;  4.  0  to  8.  0  itgjh 


Centrifuge 

MR  4  flight 

Postrun 

Preflight 

Postflight 

Prerun 

+  30  min 

+2  hr 

—  4  days 

+  1  hr 

+  5  hr 

+  49  hr 

147 

141 

143 

142 

140 

144 

141 

5.4 

5.9 

4.  6 

4.  1 

3.5 

4.4 

4.8 

89 

94 

90 

97 

95 

101 

99 

7.5 

8.0 

7.6 

7.4 

7.3 

7.1 

7.9 

4.  1 

4.3 

4.0 

3.25 

4.2 

5.0 

4.2 

3.  4 

3.  7 

3.6 

4.  15 

3. 1 

2.  1 

4.7 

78 

118 

95 

94 

136 

105 

<0.  1 

<0.1 

<0.1 

<0.1 

<0.1 

<0.1 

2.3 

7.2 

1.5 

5.  1 

16.5 

7.2 

Table  3-V. — Plasma  Enzymes  Determinations 


Normal  range, 
units 


aminases: 

.GOT  

SGPT  

Esterase  acetylcholine  

Peptidase  leucylamino  

Aldolase  

Isomerase  phosphohexose . 
Dehygrogenases: 

Lactic  

Malic  

Succinic  

Inosine  

Alpha-ketoglutaric .... 

Tsocitric  

L-Glutamic  

Alk  phos  


I 


0  to  35 
0  to  20 
i  130  to  260 
100  to  310 
50  to  150 
2  10  to  20 

150  to  250 
150  to  250 
Neg. 
Neg. 
Neg. 
Oto  10 
0  to  10 


Centrifuge 


MR-4  flight 


Prerun 


15 
8 

260 
190 
19 


Postrun 


+  30  min 


19 

8 

215 
250 
28 


170 
140 

Neg. 

Neg. 

Neg. 


ApH  units. 
Bodansky  units. 


155 
220 

Neg. 

Neg. 

Neg. 


-2  hr 


13 
8 

280 
200 
22 


Preflight 


190 
170 

Neg. 

Neg. 

Neg. 


-4  days 


Postflight 


+  3  hr 


+  49  hr 


19 

21 

28 

6 

6 

7 

225 

205 

165 

370 

375 

385 

6 

13 

3 

42 

86 

17 

190 

250 

220 

235 

275 

220 

Neg. 

Neg. 

Neg. 

3 

6 

3 

11 

3 

11 

3 


13 


Table  3-VT. — Comparison  of  Physical  Examination  Findings  During  Simulated  and  Actual  Flight 


Simulated  Redstone  I 

Simulated  Redstone  II 

1 

MR-4  High 

temperature,   r  : 



lie  lore  

y  i  .o 

After  

99.0  

98.0  

98.4 

Change  

]  J  

0.6  

0.6 

w  eight,  lb: 

i  j  f\. 

1  Z.H  11 

llo.Zo   

150.5 

After  

147.10  

146.36  

147.5 

i '  „ . , 

oU  I  

o.U 

1  ulse  rate  per  mm: 

Before  

68  

69  

68 

4iter  

Oi  

0,1 

81   . 

loo  to  HJ4 

"I  >  1          1                                /T    t  \  TT 

±>loo(i  pressure  (LA;,  nim  rig; 

TJefore 

110 '68 

100  '70 

128,73 

\ft--r  

100-70  

128/80  

120/84 

Vital  capacitv,  liters; 

' 

■ 

Before  

5.9  

5.0 

After  

5.4  

45 

Postflight  physical  findings.  .  .  

Chest  clear  to  P  and 

Chest  clear;  DTR's 

Chest  clear;  no  pete- 

A; slightly  increased 

2  +  ;  no  petechia. 

chia;  appeared 

DTR's;  no  change 

fatigued. 

in  ECG;  no  pete- 

chia; appears  warm 

and  tired. 

14 


4.  PHYSIOLOGICAL  RESPONSES  OF  THE  ASTRONAUT 
IN  THE  MR-4  SPACE  FLIGHT 

By  C.  Patrick  Lauchlin,  M.D.,  Life  Systems  Division,  NASA  Manned  Spacecraft  Center;  and  William 
S.  Augerson,  M.D.,  Life  Systems  Division,  NASA  Manned  Spacecraft  Center 


Objectives 

The  space  flight  of  Mercury-Redstone  4  accom- 
plished several  life-science  objectives.  Specifically, 
a  second  United  States  astronaut  experienced  the 
complex  stresses  associated  with  manned  space 
flight;  physiological  data  reflecting  the  responses 
of  a  second  United  States  astronaut  to  space  flight 
were  obtained ;  and  additional  experience  was  gained 
in  the  support  of  manned  space  flight  which  will 
influence  procedures  in  subsequent  operations. 

The  Space  Flight  Environment 

After  two  attempts  at  launching  in  the  4  days  pre- 
ceding the  flight,  Astronaut  Grissom  entered  the 
■raft  at  3:58  a.m.  e.s.t.  on  July  21,  1961.  His 
ation  had  proceeded  smoothly,  beginning  at 
1:10  a.m.  e.s.t.  as  discussed  in  paper  5.  He  was 
wearing  the  Mercury  full-pressure  suit  and  was  posi- 
tioned in  his  contour  couch  in  the  semisupine  posi- 
tion, with  head  and  back  raised  approximately  10° 
and  legs  and  thighs  flexed  at  approximately  90° 
angles.  This  position  was  maintained  until  egress 
from  the  spacecraft  after  landing.  One-hundred- 
percent  oxygen  was  supplied  when  pressure  suit  con- 
nections to  the  spacecraft  environmental  control  sys- 
tem were  completed.  The  total  time  in  the  spacecraft 
during  the  countdown  was  3  hours  22  minutes.  Dur- 
ing the  extended  countdown,  Astronaut  Grissom  per- 
formed numerous  spacecraft  checks  and  "relaxed" 
with  periodic  deep  breathing,  muscle  tensing,  and 
movement  of  his  limbs.  At  the  lift-off  signal,  the 
Redstone  launch  vehicle  ignited  and  accelerated 
smoothly,  attaining  a  peak  of  6.3g  at  T  +  2  minutes 
22  seconds.  Then  the  spacecraft  separated  from  the 
launch  vehicle  and  gravity  forces  were  abruptly 
terminated.  A  period  of  5  seconds  ensued  while 
spacecraft  turnaround  and  rate  damping  occurred. 
During  the  5  minutes  of  weightless  flight  which  fol- 
\,  Astronaut  Grissom  was  quite  active  in  per- 


forming vehicle  control  maneuvers  and  with  monitor- 
ing of  spacecraft  systems.  He  was,  in  his  own  words, 
"fascinated"  with  the  view  from  the  spacecraft  win- 
dow. The  firing  of  the  retrorockets  at  T  +  5  minutes 
10  seconds  resulted  in  a  brief  lg  deceleration.  At 
T  +  7  minutes  28  seconds  the  0.05g  relay  signaled 
the  onset  of  reentry,  and  deceleration  forces  climbed 
quickly  to  llg.  Drogue  and  main  parachute  actua- 
tion occurred  at  T  +  9  minutes  41  seconds  and  T  + 
10  minutes  13  seconds,  respectively,  and  a  4g  spike 
was  seen  with  opening  of  the  main  parachute.  Land- 
ing occurred  at  T  +  15  minutes  37  seconds.  7:35 
a.m.  e.s.t. 

Suit  and  cabin  pressure  levels  declined  rapidly 
from  launch  ambient  levels,  as  programed,  and  sta- 
bilized at  approximately  5  psia  with  the  suit  pressure 
slightly  above  cabin  pressure.  These  pressures  were 
maintained  until  snorkle  valve  opening  at  T  +  9 
minutes  30  seconds  during  parachute  descent. 

Suit  inlet  temperature  ranged  from  55°  F  to  62°  F 
during  countdown  and  flight  and  reached  a  level  of 
73°  F  after  approximately  9  minutes  on  the  water 
after  landing. 

Monitoring  and  Data  Sources 

Medical  monitoring  techniques  and  biosensor 
application  were  identical  with  those  utilized  in  the 
MR-3  mission  (ref.  1).  The  total  monitoring  time 
was  approximately  3  hours  and  35  minutes,  com- 
mencing with  entrance  into  the  spacecraft  and  end- 
ing in  loss  of  signal  after  landing.  Physiological 
data  were  monitored  from  the  medical  consoles  in 
Mercury  Control  Central  and  the  Redstone  block- 
house, and  signals  were  received  during  the  later 
flight  stages  at  Bermuda  and  on  downrange  ships. 
Again  the  astronaut's  inflight  voice  transmissions 
and  postflight  debriefing  were  particularly  signifi- 
cant as  data  sources.  (Samples  of  inflight  tele- 
metry data  recorded  at  various  monitoring  stations 
are  shown  in  figs.  4-1  to  4-4.)     In  addition,  the 


15 


1  Sec  )>  tj 

Figure  4-L  Blockhouse  telemetry  record  obtained  during  countdown  (5;43  a.m.  e.s.t.). 


canceled  mission  of  July  19  with  4  hours  of  count- 
down provided  interesting  comparative  physiologi- 
cal data.  Astronaut  Grisfiom's  physiologic  responses 
to  17  Mercury- Redstone  g-profile  centrifuge  runs 
were  also  available  as  dynamic  control  data.  Un- 
fortunately, the  astronaut:  observer  camera  film  was 
lost  with  the  sunken  spacecraft. 

Results  of  Observations  of  Physiological 
Function 

Figures  4-5  and  4-6  depict  the  pulse  rate  during 
the  countdown,  tabulatec  by  a  10-second  duration 
pulse  count  for  each  minute  of  count  time.  Pulse 
rates  occurring  at  similar  events  in  the  canceled  mis- 
sion countdown  are  also  indicated.  The  countdown 
pulse  rate  ranged  from  65  to  116  per  minute  until 
shortly  before  lift'off.  As  plotted  in  figure  4-7, 
pulse  rate  began  accelerating  from  T— 1  minutes 
through  launch,  attaining  a  rate  of  162  beats  per 
minute  at  spacecraft  separation  and  turnaround 
maneuver.  Some  slight  rate  decline  trend  was  ap- 
parent during  the  first  2  minutes  of  weightlessness, 
returning  to  a  high  of  171  beats  per  minute  with 


retrorocket  firing.  The  pulse  rate  was  above  iaO 
beats  per  minute  during  all  but  a  few  seconds  of 
weightlessness.  Pulse  rate  declined  slightly  follow- 
ing reentry  deceleration  and  then  fluctuated  con- 
siderably during  parachute  descent  and  was  137 
beats  per  minute  on  landing.  All  inflight  pulse  rates 
were  determined  every  15  seconds,  counting  for  10- 
second  durations. 

Electrocardiographic  trace  quality  from  both 
sternal  and  axillary  leads  was  quite  satisfactory  dur- 
ing countdown  and  flight.  Sinus  tachycardia  and 
occasional  sinus  arrhythmia  were  present.  No  ab- 
normalities of  rhythm  or  wave  form  were  observed. 

Respiratory  rate  during  countdown  varied  from 
12  to  24  breaths  per  minute  as  shown  in  figures  4—5 
and  4-6.  Unfortunately,  respiratory  trace  quality, 
which  had  been  quite  acceptable  during  countdown, 
deteriorated  during  most  of  the  flight,  precluding 
rate  tabulation.  Some  readable  trace  returned  late 
in  the  flight,  and  a  high  of  32  breaths  per  minute 
was  noted. 

Body  temperature  (rectal)  varied  from  99.5° 
mediately  after  astronaut  entry  into  the  spac 


16 


to  98.6°  just  before  launch.  There  was  a  gradual 
v"  se  to  99.2°  in  the  latter  phases  of  flight.  These 
*  i  are  considered  to  be  insignificant,  and,  sub- 

jectively, temperature  comfort  was  reported  to  be 
quite  satisfactory  during  the  countdown  and  flight. 

Astronaut  Grissom  made  coherent  and  appro- 
priate voice  transmissions  throughout  the  flight.  At 
the  postflight  debriefing,  he  reported  a  number  of 
subjective  impressions  gained  while  in  flight.  He 
noted  that  the  vibration  experienced  at  maximum 
dynamic  pressure  was  "very  minor"  and  did  not 
interfere  with  vision.  A  brief  tumbling  sensation 
was  noted  at  launch-vehicle  cutoff.  This  sensation 
was  only  momentary  and  was  not  accompanied  by 
nausea  or  disturbed  vision.    A  distinct  feeling  of 


sitting  upright  and  moving  backward  was  described 
and  the  sensation  reversed  to  forward  travel  with 
retrorocket  firing.  This  orientation  may  have  been 
related  to  his  position  relative  to  Cape  Canaveral; 
that  is,  observing  the  Cape  receding  behind  through 
the  spacecraft  window.  No  disturbances  in  well- 
being  were  reported  during  the  flight  and  the  ab- 
sence of  gravity  produced  no  specifically  recognized 
symptoms.  The  astronaut  was  not  aware  of  his 
heart  beating  throughout  the  mission.  Hearing  was 
adequate  throughout  the  flight  according  to  pilot 
reports  and  voice  responses.  Near  and  distant 
visual  acuity  and  color  vision  appeared  to  be  nor- 
mally retained.  The  jettisoned  escape  tower  was 
followed  for  several  seconds  through  the  spacecraft 


Change  of  record  speed 

Figure  4-2.  Mercury  Control  Center  record  during  launch  phase  {00:30  to  00:45).    First  part  of  record  at  25  mm/sec, 

second  part  at  10  mm/sec. 


17 


Figure  4—3.  Bermuda  Mercury  Station  record  (10  mm/sec)  taken  just  before  0,05g  as  period  of  weightlessness  was 

nearing  end. 


window  and  a  planet  (Venus)  was  observed  just  be- 
fore burnout.  Vivid  contrasting  color  was  reported 
during  observation  of  the  sky  and  earth.  The  pro- 
gramed turnaround  and  other  maneuvers  of  the 
spacecraft  produced  charging  levels  of  illumination 
within  the  cabin,  necessitating  considerable  visual 
adaptation. 

Improved  environmental  control  system  instru- 
mentation permitted  a  extermination  of  astronaut 
oxygen  consumption  during  the  countdown.  This 
was  calculated  to  be  abou  :  500  cc/min.  A  very  high 
usage  rate  was  noted  during  flight  as  a  result  of 
system  leakage,  and  mettbolic  utilization  could  not 
be  determined. 


Astronaut  Grissom's  Mercury-Redstone  centrifuge 
pulse  rates  were  tabulated  and  are  presented  graph- 
ically in  figure  4-7  for  comparison  with  the  flight 
pulse  data.  The  highest  rate  noted  for  his  centrifuge 
experience  wras  135  beats  per  minute.  Also  shown  in 
figure  4-7  are  Astronaut  Grissom's  respiratory  rate 
responses  during  four  Mercury-Redstone  centrifuge 
sessions. 

Conclusions 

An  evaluation  of  the  physiological  responses  of 
the  astronaut  of  the  MR^I  space  flight  permits  the 
following  conclusions: 


18 


W  A/ 


r 


W  \ 


Respiratory  trace.      (Some  variations  represent  speech) 


i  ■/,/| 


ECG  trace  1   (Axillary  -  small  ampitude  displacements  due  to  muscle  movement) 


•  \  v  •  V -V .v ! v  V •  V •  V A  v  A ,v  A ,.v  A,  v  \ >  ■■  A  v  . v- 'A  *  x  '■ 


ECG  2   (Sternal)  Showing  sinus  tachycardia 


Body  temperature  trace 
(99. 2°F) 


Figure  4^1.  Telemetry-aircraft  record  obtained  9  minutes  after  reentry. 


(1)  There  is  no  evidence  that  the  space  flight 
stresses  encountered  in  the  MR^l  mission  produced 
detrimental  physiological  effects. 

{2)  The  pulse-rate  responses  reflected  Astronaut 
Grissom's  individual  reaction  to  the  multiple  stresses 


imposed  and  were  consistent  with  intact  perform- 
ance function. 

(3)  No  specific  physiologic  findings  could  be 
attributed  to  weightlessness  or  to  acceleration- 
weightlessness  transition  stresses. 


Reference 

1.  Henry,  James  P.,  and  Wheelwright,  Chari.es  D. :  Bioinstrumentatioti  in  MR-3  Flight.    Proc.  Conf.  on  Results  of  the 
virst  U.S.  Manned  Suborbital  Space  Flight,  NASA,  Nat.  Inst.  Health,  and  Nat.  Acad.  Sci.,  June  6,  1961,  pp.  37^3. 


19 


Fig i  re  4-6.  Pulse  and  respiration  rates  during  countdown  (5:40  to  7:20  a.m.  e.s.t.i. 


20 


5.  FLIGHT  SURGEON'S  REPORT  FOR  MERCURY-REDSTONE 

MISSIONS  3  AND  4 


By  William  K.  Douglas,  M.D.,  Astronaut  Flight  Surgeon,  NASA  Manned  Spacecraft  Center 


Introduction 

This  paper  describes  some  of  the  operational  as- 
pects of  the  medical  support  of  the  two  manned  sub- 
orbital space  flights,  designated  Mercury-Redstone  3 
and  Mercury-Redstone  4.  The  results  of  the  medical 
investigative  procedures  are  reported  in  paper  3  of 
the  present  volume  and  in  reference  1.  These  op- 
erational aspects  can  be  conveniently  divided  into 
three  phases: 

(a)  The    early    preparation   period  beginning 

about  3  days  before  a  launch  and  conclud- 
ing at  about  T  — 12  hours 

(b)  The  immediate  preflight  preparation 

(c)  The  debriefing  period 

Preparation  of  the  Pilot 

fart  of  the  philosophy  behind  the  decision  to  ex- 
ecute manned  suborbital  space  flights  was  to  provide 
experience  and  practice  for  subsequent  orbital" 
flights.  In  light  of  this  philosophy,  it  was  decided 
that  during  suborbital  flights  all  preparations  will 
be  made  for  the  orbital  flight.  This  explains  the 
reason  for  such  things  as  the  low  residue  diet  and 
other  seemingly  inappropriate  steps  in  the  prepara- 
tion and  support  of  the  pilot. 

Three  days  before  the  planned  launch  day,  the 
pilot  and  the  backup  pilot  start  taking  all  of  their 
meals  in  a  special  feeding  facility.  Here,  a  special 
low  residue  diet  is  provided.  Preparation  of  this 
diet  is  supervised  by  an  accredited  dietitian,  and  the 
actual  preparation  is  performed  by  a  cook  whose  sole 
duty  during  this  period  is  to  prepare  these  meals. 
One  extra  serving  of  each  item  is  prepared  for  each 
meal.  This  sample  meal  is  kept  under  refrigeration 
for  24  hours  so  that  it  will  be  available  for  study 
in  the  event  that  the  pilot  develops  a  gastrointestinal 
illness  during  this  period  or  subsequently.  An  effort 
is  also  made  to  assure  that  several  people  eat  each 


meal  so  that  an  epidemiological  study  can  be  facili- 
tated if  necessary.  The  menu  for  these  meals  was 
provided  by  Miss  Beatrice  Finklestein  of  the  Aero- 
space Medical  Laboratory,  Aeronautical  Systems 
Division,  U.S.  Air  Force  Systems  Command.  The 
diet  is  tasty  and  palatable  as  is  shown  in  table  5-1 
which  gives  a  typical  day's  menu.  It  has  caused  no 
gastrointestinal  upsets  and  is  well  tolerated  by  all 
persons  who  have  consumed  it.  In  order  to  assure 
that  it  would  be  well  tolerated,  all  of  the  Mercury 
astronauts  consumed  this  diet  for  a  3-day  period 
during  one  of  their  visits  to  Wright-Patterson  Air 
Force  Base  in  one  of  the  early  phases  of  their  train- 
ing program.  The  use  of  a  separate  feeding  facility 
provides  the  ability  to  control  strictly  the  sanitation 
of  food  preparation  during  this  preflight  period. 
Such  control  could  not  as  easily  be  exercised  if 
meals  were  taken  in  a  community  cafeteria. 

During  this  3-day  period  before  the  launch  day, 
the  pilot  lives  in  the  Crew  Quarters  of  Hangar  "S" 
which  is  located  in  the  industrial  complex  of  Cape 
Canaveral.  Here  he  is  provided  with  a  comfortable 
bed,  pleasant  surroundings,  television,  radio,  reading 
materials  and,  above  all,  privacy.  In  addition  to 
protection  from  the  curious-minded  public,  the  estab- 
lishment of  the  pilot  and  the  backup  pilot  in  the 
Crew  Quarters  also  provides  a  modicum  of  isolation 
from  carriers  of  infectious  disease  organisms.  This 
isolation  is  by  no  means  complete  and  it  is  not  in- 
tended to  be.  An  effort  is  made  to  provide  isolation 
from  new  arrivals  in  the  community,  however.  It 
is  felt  that  a  certain  amount  of  natural  immunity 
has  been  acquired  by  the  pilots  in  their  day-to-day 
contacts  with  their  associates  at  the  launch  site. 
Contact  with  visitors  from  different  sections  of  the 
country  might,  however,  introduce  a  strain  to  which 
no  immunity  had  been  acquired.  Consideration  was 
given  at  one  time  to  the  use  of  strict  isolation  tech- 
niques during  this  preparation  period,  but  this 


23 


thought  was  abandoned  because  of  its  impracticality. 
The  pilot  plays  a  vital  role  in  the  preparations  for 
his  own  flight.  In  order  to  be  effective,  a  period  of 
strict  isolation  would  have  to  last  for  about  2  weeks; 
thus,  the  services  of  these  important  individuals 
would  he  unavailable  for  that  period.  Further,  it 
was  felt  that  a  2-week  period  of  strict  isolation  would 
constitute  a  psychological  burden  which  could  not 
be  justified  by  the  results  obtained.  As  mentioned 
previously,  the  pilot  and  his  colleagues  play  a  vital 
role  in  the  preparation  of  the  spacecraft  and  its 
launch  vehicle  for  the  flight.  This  period  begins 
about  2  weeks  prior  to  launch  and  continues  up  until 
the  day  before  the  launch.  During  this  period  of 
time,  the  pilot,  on  occasions,  must  don  his  full  pres- 
sure suit  and  occupy  the  role  of  "capsule  observer" 
during  the  course  of  certain  checkout  procedures. 
Advantage  is  taken  of  these  exercises  to  perform 
launch  rehearsals  of  varying  degrees  of  sophisti- 
cation. The  most  complete  of  these  exercises  occurs 
during  the  simulated  flight  which  takes  place  2  or  3 
days  prior  to  the  launch.  This  dress  rehearsal  dupli- 
cates the  launch  countdown  in  event  time  and  in 
elapsed  time,  but  it  occurs  at  a  more  convenient  hour 
of  the  day.  It  not  only  enables  those  responsible  for 
the  readiness  of  the  spacecraft  and  the  launch  vehicle 
to  assure  themselves  of  the  status  of  these  com- 
ponents, but  it  also  allows  those  directly  concerned 
with  the  preparation  and  insertion  of  the  pilot  to 
assure  themselves  of  the.r  own  state  of  readiness. 
Finally,  these  exercises  provide  a  certain  degree  of 
assurance  and  familiarity  for  the  pilot  himself. 

On  the  evening  before  the  flight,  the  pilot  is  en- 
couraged to  retire  at  an  early  hour,  but  he  is  not  re- 
quired to  do  so.  The  pilot  of  MR-3  spacecraft  re- 
tired at  10:15  p.m.  e.s.t,  and  the  pilot  of  MR^l 
spacecraft  retired  at  9:0C  p.m.  e.s.t.  In  both  cases 
the  pilots  fell  asleep  shortly  after  retiring  without 
benefit  of  sedatives  or  drugs  of  any  kind.  Their 
sleep  was  sound,  and  insofar  as  they  could  remember, 
was  dreamless.  The  medical  countdown  for  MR-4 
flight  called  for  awakening  the  pilot  at  1 : 10  a.m.  e.s.t. 
(table  5-II).  This  time  was  65  minutes  later  than 
the  wake-up  time  called  for  in  the  MR-3  countdown. 
Time  was  saved  here  by  allowing  the  pilot  to  shave 
and  bathe  before  retiring  instead  of  after  awakening 
in  the  morning.  Another  15  minutes  was  saved  by 
performing  the  final  operational  briefing  in  the 
transfer  van  on  the  way  to  the  launch  pad,  rather 
than  after  arrival  as  was  done  in  MR-3  flight.  When 
they  were  awakened  on  the  morning  of  the  launch, 
both  pilots  appeared  to  have  been  sleeping  soundly. 


There  was  no  startle  reaction  on  awakening,  and  the 
immediate  postwaking  state  was  characterir 
eager  anticipation  and  curiosity  as  to  the  pro' 
the  countdown.  After  awakening,  the  pilots  per- 
formed their  morning  ablutions  and  consumed  a  high 
protein  breakfast  consisting  of  fruit,  steak,  eggs, 
juice,  and  milk.  No  coffee  was  permitted  during  the 
24-hour  period  preceding  the  flight  because  of  its 
tendency  to  inhibit  sleep.  No  coffee  was  permitted 
for  breakfast  on  launch  morning  because  of  its 
diuretic  properties. 

After  breakfast,  the  pilots  donned  bathrobes  and 
were  taken  into  the  physical  examination  room  where 
the  preflight  physical  was  performed.  This  exami- 
nation is  distinct  from  that  conducted  for  the  purpose 
of  collecting  background  scientific  data,  which  was 
performed  by  several  examiners  2  to  3  days  prior  to 
the  flight.  This  early  examination  is  reported  in 
paper  3  of  the  present  volume  and  in  reference  1. 
The  physical  examination  performed  on  the  morning 
of  the  flight  was  designed  to  ascertain  the  pilot's  fit- 
ness to  perform  his  mission.  It  was  designed  to  dis- 
cover any  acute  illness  or  infirmity  which  might 
contraindicate  the  flight. 

These  examinations  failed  to  reveal  anything  of 
significance.  The  physiological  bradycardia  (pulse 
rate  60  to  70 1  and  normotensive  (blood  pressure 
110/70)  state  both  give  some  indication  of  the 
reserved  air  of  confidence  which  typifies  h< 
these  pilots.  It  is  important  to  emphasize  at  .„is 
point  that  no  medication  of  any  kind  was  consumed 
by  either  of  these  pilots  during  the  several  days  pre- 
ceding the  launch.  Following  the  preflight  physical 
examination,  each  of  the  pilots  was  given  a  short 
battery  of  psychological  tests.  In  the  case  of  the 
MR^l  pilot,  it  was  possible  to  provide  a  short  inter- 
view by  a  psychiatrist.  Both  the  testing  and  the 
interview  were  part  of  the  medical  investigative  pro- 
gram and  are  reported  in  paper  3  of  the  present 
volume  and  reference  1.  Suffice  it  to  say  at  this  point 
that  no  abnormalities  were  detected. 

The  next  step  in  the  preparatory  procedures  was 
the  application  of  the  biological  sensor  harness  (figs. 
5—1  and  5—2 ) .  This  harness  is  described  in  detail 
in  reference  2.  The  only  difference  between  the 
sensors  used  in  MR-3  and  MR^l  flights  was  an 
alteration  of  the  respiration  sensor  housing  for  the 
MR-4  flight  to  accommodate  the  microphone  of 
different  configuration  used  in  the  later  flight.  The 
surface  of  the  electrode  next  to  the  skin  is  prepared 
with  an  adhesive  material  identical  to  that  found 
on  conventional  adhesive  tape   (elastoplast  ' 


24 


Ficlre  5-1.  Three  views  of  a  typical  electrocardiograph  floating  electrode  as  used  in  Project  Mercury.    The  surface  of 
the  electrode  applied  to  the  skin  (right)   is  first  painted  with  adhesive  and  then  filled  with  bentonite  paste. 


This  preparation  must  be  done  at  least  15 
,tes  in  advance  since  the  solvent  for  the  adhesive 
is  irritating  to  the  skin  and  must  be  given  ample 
opportunity  to  evaporate  before  the  sensor  is  ap- 
plied. The  dermal  surface  of  this  electrode  is  first 
filled  with  bentonite  paste  and  the  electrode  is  ap- 
plied directly  to  the  skin.  The  skin  is  first  prepared 
by  clipping  the  hair  where  necessary  and  by  cleans- 
ing with  surgical  detergent  (FSN  6505-116-1740). 
The  sensor  locations  have  been  previously  marked 
on  all  Mercury  pilots  by  the  use  of  a  tiny  (about  2 
millimeters  in  diameter  )  tattooed  dot  at  each  of  the 
four  electrode  sites.  After  the  sensor  is  applied  to 
the  skin,  the  uppermost  surface  of  the  screen  is 
covered  with  the  bentonite  paste  and  a  small  square 
of  electrician's  plastic  tape  is  applied  over  the  opening 
in  the  disk.  The  entire  electrode  is  then  covered 
with  a  square  of  moleskin  adhesive  tape.  This  as- 
sembly becomes,  then,  a  floating  electrode.  The 
electrician's  tape  serves  to  retard  somewhat  the  evap- 
oration of  water  from  the  bentonite  paste. 

The  deep  body  temperature  probe  (fig.  5-2)  is 
simply  a  flexible  rubber-covered  thermistor.  Since 
it  is  difficult,  if  not  impossible,  to  sterilize  this  probe 


without  causing  deterioration  of  the  device,  each 
pilot  is  provided  with  his  own  personal  sensor  har- 
ness. This  same  harness  is  used  in  all  practice  exer- 
cises in  which  the  individual  participates.  It  is 
simply  washed  with  surgical  detergent  after  each 
use. 

After  the  harness  is  applied,  the  integrity  of  the 
sensors  is  checked  by  the  use  of  a  modified  Dallon 
Cardioscope  [fig.  5-3).  With  this  device,  both 
electrocardiographic  leads  can  be  displayed  on  the 
oscilloscope,  and  the  amplitude  of  the  QRS  (Q- 
wave,  R— wave,  S— wave)  complex  can  be  measured 
roughly  by  comparing  it  with  a  standard  1 -millivolt 
current.  The  integrity  of  the  respiration  sensor  can 
also  be  demonstrated  by  displaying  the  trace  on  the 
oscilloscope.  No  effort  is  made  to  calibrate  the 
respiration  sensor  at  this  time.  The  temperature 
probe  is  also  checked  by  use  of  a  Wheatstone  bridge. 

After  the  sensors  have  been  applied,  the  pilot 
moves  to  the  pressure-suit  room  where  he  dons  his 
suit.  Since  the  most  uncomfortable  period  of  the 
countdown  is  that  time  spent  in  the  suit,  a  check  is 
made  with  the  blockhouse  to  determine  the  status 
of  the  count.    If  there  has  been  a  delay  or  if  one  is 


25 


anticipated,  the  suit  donning  is  held  up  at  this  point. 
At  some  convenient  time  during  the  day  before  the 
flight,  the  suit  has  been  assembled  and  inflated  to 
5  psi,  and  a  leak  check  is  made.  The  "static"  leak 
rate  is  determined  at  this  time.  These  values  were 
190  cc/min  and  140  cc/min  for  the  MR-3  and 
MR— 1  flights,  respectively.  After  the  pilot  has 
donned  his  suit,  he  is  placed  in  a  couch  in  the  pres- 
sure-suit room  and  the  suit  is  again  inflated  to  5  psi. 
The  ventilation  flow  is  then  turned  off  and  a  "dy- 
namic'' leak  rate  is  obtained  by  reference  to  the  flow 
of  oxygen  necessary  to  maintain  this  pressure.  The 
dynamic  leak  rate  for  the  MR-3  flight  was  400 
cc  'min;  for  the  MR— 4,  it  was  175  cc/min.  The 
term  "leak  rate"  in  this  dynamic  situation  is  used 
rather  loosely  since  it  encompasses  not  only  the  ac- 
tual leak  rate  of  the  suit  but  also  the  metabolic  use 
of  oxygen.  Exact  measurement  of  this  rate  is 
further  complicated  by  the  presence  of  a  breathing 
occupant  of  the  suit;  cianges  in  the  occupant's 
volume  occasioned  by  respiratory  movements  are 
reflected  as  changes  in  the  flow  rate,  but  a  rough  es- 


timation is  possible  even  under  these  circumstances. 

After  the  pilot  is  laced  in  the  couch  but  b  ■'  -*t 
the  dynamic  leak  rate  is  determined,  the  tor 
per  of  the  suit  is  opened  and  the  amplifier  fo.  „e 
respiration  sensor  is  delivered.  With  the  visor 
closed,  and  with  the  microphone  positioned  as  for 
flight,  the  amplifier  is  adjusted  to  provide  a  signal 
strong  enough  to  be  easily  observed  but  not  so 
strong  as  to  overload  the  spacecraft  telemetry  equip- 
ment. Once  the  dynamic  leak  rate  has  been  de- 
termined, the  suit  is  not  again  disturbed  except  to 
open  the  helmet  visor.  No  zippers  are  permitted  to 
be  loosened  from  that  time  on.  Upon  completion 
of  the  suit  donning  procedure,  the  pilot  returns  to 
the  examination  room  where  the  biosensors  are 
again  checked  on  the  oscilloscope.  This  would  de- 
tect any  disturbance  created  by  the  donning  of  the 
suit,  and  permit  it  to  be  corrected  at  this  point  rather 
than  later. 

If  the  medical  count  and  the  main  countdown  are 
still  in  agreement,  a  portable  ventilating  unit  is  at- 
tached to  the  suit  and  the  pilot  and  insertion  team 


proceed  to  the  transfer  van.  Upon  his  arrival  at 
»"  -nsfer  van,  the  onboard  ventilation  system  is 
,-d.  The  integrity  of  the  biosensors  is  again 
checked  by  use  of  a  Model  350,  8-channel  Sanborn 
recorder.  The  Sanborn  recorder  remains  attached 
to  the  pilot  from  this  point  on,  and  a  continuous  re- 
cording of  the  measured  biological  functions  is 
started.  A  sample  record  taken  while  the  van  was 
in  motion  is  shown  in  figure  5-4. 

Upon  arrival  at  the  launch  site,  two  final  strips 
of  record  are  obtained  from  the  Sanborn  recorder 
and  delivered  to  the  medical  monitors  at  the  block- 
house and  at  the  Mercury  Control  Center.  Both  of 
these  records  contain  a  1 -millivolt  standardization 
pulse,  and  are  utilized  by  the  monitors  to  compare 
with  their  records  as  obtained  from  the  spacecraft. 
When  notified  to  do  so  by  the  blockhouse,  the  port- 
able ventilating  unit  is  reattached.  The  pilot,  flight 
surgeon,  pressure-suit  technician,  and  a  pilot  ob- 


server (astronaut)  leave  the  transfer  van  and  proceed 
up  the  elevator  to  the  level  of  the  spacecraft. 

At  this  point,  the  preparation  of  the  pilot  ceases 
and  the  actual  insertion  of  the  pilot  into  the  space- 
craft commences.  After  the  pilot  climbs  into  the 
spacecraft  and  positions  himself  in  the  couch,  the 
pressure-suit  technician  attaches  the  ventilation 
hoses,  the  communication  line,  the  biosensor  leads, 
and  the  helmet  visor  seal  hose,  and  finally,  he  attaches 
the  restraint  harness  in  position  but  only  fastens  it 
loosely.  At  this  point,  the  suit  and  environmental 
control  system  is  purged  with  100-percent  oxygen 
until  such  a  time  as  analysis  of  the  gas  in  the  system 
shows  that  the  oxygen  concentration  exceeds  95  per- 
cent. When  the  purge  of  the  suit  system  is  com- 
pleted, the  pressure-suit  technician  tightens  the  re- 
straint harness;  the  flight  surgeon  makes  a  final  in- 
spection of  the  interior  of  the  spacecraft  and  of  the 
pilot,  and  the  hatch  installation  commences.  During 


- 


Ficure  5-3.  Cardioscope  used  to  check  out  the  biosensor  harness.    The  lead  into  the  suit  is  shown  on  the  lower  right,  and 
the  switching  box  to  display  respiration  and  temperature  is  shown  on  the  lower  left. 


27 


Figure  5-4.  Sample  record  f:om  Sanborn  recorder  taken  in  the  transfer  van.    The  van  was  in  motion  at  the 

recording  was  made. 


28 


the  insertion  procedures,  it  is  the  flight  surgeon's 
to  monitor  the  suit  purge  procedure  and  to 
.  by  to  assist  the  pressure-suit  technician  or  the 
pilot  in  any  way  he  can.  The  final  inspection  of  the 
pilot  by  the  flight  surgeon  gives  some  indication  of 
the  pilot's  emotional  state  at  the  last  possible  oppor- 
tunity. The  flight  surgeon  during  this  period  is  in 
continuous  communication  w-ith  the  blockhouse  sur- 
geon and  is  capable  of  taking  certain  steps  to  analyze 
the  cause  of  biosensor  malfunction,  should  it  occur. 
No  such  malfunctions  occurred  during  the  course  of 
these  two  flights.  After  hatch  installation  is  com- 
pleted, the  flight  surgeon  is  released  and  proceeds  to 
the  forward  medical  station  where  he  joins  the  point 
team  of  the  land  recovery  forces. 

Debriefing 

After  a  successful  launch,  the  flight  surgeon  leaves 
his  position  on  the  point  team  and  proceeds  imme- 
diately to  the  Mercury  Control  Center.  Here  he  fol- 
lows the  progress  of  the  recovery  operations  until 
it  is  clear  where  his  services  will  be  needed  next.  In 
the  event  the  pilot  is  injured  or  is  ill.  the  flight  sur- 
geon is  taken  by  air  to  the  aircraft  carrier  in  the 
recovery  area.  If  it  is  clear  that  the  pilot  is  unin- 
jured, as  was  true  for  MR-3  and  MR^t  flights,  the 
flight  surgeon  joins  the  debriefing  team  and  is  flown 
\e  medical  care  and  debriefing  site  at  Grand 
.ma  Island,  British  West  Indies.  During  this 
time,  the  pilot  is  undergoing  a  preliminary  physical 
examination  and  debriefing  aboard  the  carrier.  In 
both  of  the  flights  under  discussion,  the  debriefing 
team  arrived  at  Grand  Bahama  Island  about  30  min- 
utes before  the  pilot  who  was  flown  there  from  the 
carrier.  The  debriefing  site  is  a  two-room  prefabri- 
cated building  with  an  adjacent  heliport.  The  heli- 
port is  provided  in  the  event  it  is  more  convenient, 
or  is  necessary  by  virtue  of  his  physical  status,  to 
carry  the  pilot  from  the  surface  vessel  to  the  de- 
briefing site  by  helicopter. 

Immediately  upon  their  arrival  at  Grand  Bahama 
Island,  the  pilots  were  taken  to  the  debriefing  build- 
ing where  the  flight  surgeon  performed  a  careful 
physical  examination.  Here  again,  the  purpose  of 
this  examination  was  not  so  much  to  collect  scientific 
material  as  to  assure  that  the  pilot  was  uninjured 
and  in  good  health.  When  this  preliminary  exam- 
ination had  been  completed,  the  pilots  were  exam- 
ined by  a  surgeon.  No  evidence  of  injury  was 
found  by  this  second  examiner.  Next,  an  internist 
examined  the  pilots.  Laboratory  specimens  (blood 
urine)  were  obtained  and  the  pilots  were  exam- 


ined by  an  ophthalmologist,  a  neurologist,  and  a 
psychiatrist.  Chest  X-rays  (anteroposterior  and 
right  lateral)  were  taken.  The  results  of  all  of 
these  examinations  were,  in  the  main,  negative  and 
have  been  reported  in  paper  3  of  the  present  volume 
and  reference  1 .  Upon  completion  of  the  physical 
examination,  the  pilots  were  turned  over  to  the  engi- 
neering debriefing  team. 

The  original  plan  for  the  pilot's  postrecovery 
activities  permitted  him  to  remain  at  Grand  Bahama 
Island  for  48  hours  after  his  arrival.  This  period 
was  believed  to  be  necessary  to  permit  full  and  ade- 
quate recovery  from  the  effects  of  the  flight.  In  the 
case  of  the  MR-3  flight,  it  was  possible  for  the  pilot 
to  remain  for  72  hours.  The  last  day  of  this  period 
was  devoted  to  complete  rest  and  relaxation.  The 
additional  24-hour  period  was  occasioned  by  the 
scheduling  of  the  postflight  press  conference  and 
public  welcome  in  Washington,  D.C.  It  was  quite 
apparent  that  the  postflight  rest  period  was  benefi- 
cial to  the  pilot.  There  is  no  objective  measurement 
of  this,  but  the  day-to-day  observations  of  the  pilot 
showed  him  to  be  benefited  by  this  relative  isolation. 
In  the  case  of  the  MR— 4  flight,  the  pilot  seemed  to 
be  recovering  rapidly  from  the  fatiguing  effects  of 
his  flight  and  the  postflight  water-survival  experi- 
ence. His  fatigue  was  more  evident  when  seen  12 
hours  after  his  arrival  at  Grand  Bahama  Island  than 
that  observed  in  the  pilot  of  the  MR-3  flight  when 
seen  at  the  same  time.  On  the  following  day,  how- 
ever, the  MR— 4  pilot  seemed  to  be  at  about  the  same 
level  of  recovery  as  had  been  observed  in  the  MR-3 
pilot.  For  this  reason,  it  was  decided  to  permit  the 
pilot  of  the  MR-4  flight  to  return  to  Cocoa  Beach, 
Fla.,  for  a  press  conference  at  a  time  some  18  to  20 
hours  before  that  called  for  in  the  original  plan. 
No  evident  permanent  effects  of  this  early  return 
can  be  described,  and  the  pilot  performed  well  in 
his  public  appearances:  but  his  fatigue  state  was 
much  longer  in  dissipating  as  he  was  seen  in  the 
davs  subsequent  to  the  flight.  Again,  this  slower 
recovery  cannot  be  demonstrated  with  objective 
findings,  and  must  be  accepted  only  as  a  clinical 
observation  of  the  writer. 

Concluding  Remarks 

The  flight  surgeon's  activities  and  duties  in  sup- 
port of  two  manned  suborbital  flights  have  been  de- 
scribed and  certain  observations  of  the  flight  surgeon 
have  been  recorded.  In  summary,  it  is  important 
to  point  out  three  items. 


29 


(1)  During  the  12-hour  period  preceding  the 
launch,  it  is  vital  that  the  preparation  of  the  pilot 
follow  the  countdown  with  clocklike  precision.  This 
precision  becomes  more  urgent  as  the  time  ap- 
proaches for  insertion  of  the  pilot  into  the  space- 
craft. In  order  to  accomplish  this  precision,  it  is 
necessary  to  practice  the  preparation  procedures 
time  and  time  again.  Time-motion  studies  are  nec- 
essary. In  the  training  program  for  the  Mercury 
flights,  each  insertion  of  as  astronaut  into  the  cen- 
trifuge was  performed  just  as  if  it  were  a  real  launch. 
At  times  during  the  checkout  of  the  spacecraft,  it 
was  necessary  to  insert  an  astronaut  into  the  space- 
craft in  an  altitude  chamber.  Each  of  these  events 
was  conducted  as  for  a  launch.  Even  with  these 
manv  opportunities  to  practice  and  perfect  tech- 
niques, some  changes  were  made  after  the  MR-3 
flight  for  the  MR^i  flight.    The  fact  that  no  delays 


were  occasioned  by  the  preparation  procedures  at- 
tests to  the  value  of  these  repeated  practice  sesf 

(2)  Very  early  in  the  planning  for  manned  . 
flights,  it  was  decided  to  train  a  backup  man  tor 
each  position  in  the  medical  support  complex.  A 
backup  astronaut  was  always  available;  a  backup 
flight  surgeon  was  trained;  and  even  a  backup 
driver  for  the  transfer  van  was  available.  These 
backup  men  not  only  provided  substitutes  of  ready 
accessibility,  but  also  permitted  each  person  involved 
to  get  some  rest  on  occasion.  The  primary  individ- 
ual was  then  capable  of  performing  his  task  in  an 
alert  and  conscientious  manner  on  the  actual  day 
of  the  launch. 

(3)  In  future  manned  flights,  the  planned  48- 
hour  minimum  debriefing  period  should  be  ob- 
served and  even  extended  to  include  a  24-hour 
period  of  complete  rest  if  indicated  by  the  stresses 
experienced  during  the  flight. 


References 

1.  Jackson,  C.  B.,  Douglas,  William  K.,  et  aL:  Results  of  Preflight  and  Postfiight  Medical  Examinations.    Proc.  Conf. 

on  Results  of  the  First  L.S.  Manned  Suborbital  Space  Flight,  NASA,  Nat.  Inst.  Health,  and  Nat.  Acad.  Sci.,  June  fi, 
1961,  pp.  31-36. 

2.  Henry,  James  P.,  and  Wheelwright,  Charles  D.:  Biomedical  Instrumentation  in  MR-3  Flight.    Proc.  Conf.  on  Results 

of  the  First  U.S.  Manned  Suborbital  Space  Flight,  NASA,  Nat.  Inst.  Health,  and  Nat.  Acad.  Sci.,  June  6,  1961, 
pp.  37-43. 

Table  5-1. — Sample  Low-Residue  Menu 
[Third  day  prior  to  space  flight] 


Breakfast : 

Orange  juice  4  ounces 

Cream  of  wheat   Vj  cup,  cooked 

Cinnamon  or  nutmeg   Few  grains 

Scrambled  eggs  2 

Crisp  Canadian  bacon  2  to  3  slices 

Toast   I  white  bread)   1  to  2  slices 

Butter   1  teaspoon 

Strawberry  jelly   1  tablespoon 

Coffee  with  sugar   No  limit 

Lunch : 

Chicken  and  rice  soup  -1  cup 

Hamburger  patty   3  to  4  ounces 

Baked  potato  (.without  skint  1  medium 

Cottage  cheese  2  rounded  tablespoons 


Bread  (white)   1  to  2  slices 

Butter   1  teaspoon 

Sliced  peaches  (canned)  


  V-i  cup 

Coffee  or  tea  with  sugar  No  limit 

Dinner: 

Tomato  juice  4  ounces 

Baked  chicken  (white  meat)  4  ounces 

Steamed  rice   1  cup 

Pureed  peas   '/i  cup 

Melba  toast   1  to  2  slices 

Butter   1  teaspoon 

Lemon  sherbet   %  cup 

Sugar  cookies   2  to  3 

Coffee  or  tea  with  sugar  No  limit 


30 


Table  5— II. — A  Comparison  of  the  Medical  Countdown  of  MR-3  and  MR-4  Flights 


MR-3  flight 

MR-4  flight 

Event 

T —  thne^ 

a.m. 

T —  time, 

a.m. 

mm 

est 

T'T 

e'« ' 

0) 

(-') 

—  355 

1:07 

-290 

1:10 

1  {  I-f-  Q  t  ("flit 

-310 

1:45 

-275 

1:30 

-280 

2:27 

-245 

1:55 

-250 

2:48 

-215 

2:15 

^iiit  nAniiino 

-240 

3:07 

-205 

2:55 

—  2  J.U 

 1/3 

J.lO 

Enter  transportation  van  

-185 

4:09 

-150 

3:28 

Arrival  at  launch  pad  

-155 

4:31 

-125 

3:54 

-155 

4:31 

Omitted 

Omitted 

-130 

5:15 

-125 

3:55 

-118 

5:21 

-122 

4:00 

0 

9:34.13 

0 

7:20:36 

1  Planned  time  during  countdown  according  to  the  launch  document. 

2  Actual  time  event  occurred. 


31 


6.  RESULTS  OF  INFLIGHT  PILOT  PERFORMANCE  STUDIES 

FOR  THE  MR-4  FLIGHT 

By  Robert  B.  Voas,  Ph.  D-,  Head,  Training  Office,  NASA  Manned  Spacecraft  Center;  John  J.  Van  Bockel, 
Training  Office,  NASA  Manned  Spacecraft  Center;  Raymond  G.  Zedekar,  Training  Office,  NASA 
Manned  Spacecraft  Center;  and  Paul  W.  Backer,  McDonnell  Aircraft  Corp. 


Introduction 

This  paper  presents  a  second  report  on  the  ability 
of  the  pilot  to  operate  the  space  vehicle  and  perform 
all  associated  space-flight  functions  during  Mercury 
flights.  As  with  the  previous  paper,  the  analysis  is 
directed  toward  establishing  the  capability  of  the 
man  to  perform  in  the  weightless  environment  of 
space  with  essentially  the  same  proficiency  which  he 
demonstrates  under  the  more  normal  terrestrial  con- 
ditions. The  results  of  the  analysis  of  the  MR-3 
flight  indicated  that  the  pilot  was  able  to  perform 
the  space-flight  functions,  not  only  within  the  toler- 
ances required  for  the  successful  completion  of  the 
mission,  but  within  the  performance  levels  demon- 

led  in  fixed-base  trainers  on  the  ground  under 
tially  optimal  environmental  conditions.  From 
i.,c  first  manned  Mercury-Redstone  flight,  it  was  con- 
cluded that  the  performance  data  were  essentially  in 
keeping  with  the  previous  experience  with  manned 
aircraft  flying  zero-g  trajectories.  That  is,  the 
pilot  was  able  to  operate  the  space  vehicle  and  per- 
form other  flight  functions  while  exposed  to  the  un- 
usual environmental  conditions  of  space,  including 
a  5-minute  period  of  weightlessness,  without  a  de- 
tectable reduction  in  performance  efficiency.  As  in 
the  MR-3  flight,  the  astronaut's  communications  to 
the  ground  provide  one  source  of  data,  while  the 
telemetered  records  of  vehicle  attitude  under  manual 
control  provide  a  second  source,  and  a  third  source  is 
the  narrative  description  of  the  activities  and  events 
given  bv  the  pilot  during  the  postflight  debriefing. 
Xot  available  for  this  report  are  the  onboard  pic- 
tures of  the  astronaut,  since  the  film  was  lost  with 
the  spacecraft.  This  paper  attempts  to  evaluate  the 
performance  of  the  pilot  on  the  MR-4  mission,  to 
compare  the  observations  made  by  Astronaut  Shep- 
ard  and  Astronaut  Grissom  of  the  earth  and  sky, 
as  seen  from  space,  and  to  compare  their  evaluations 

he  Mercury  training  devices. 


The  Astronaut's  Flight  Activities  Plan 

Three  major  differences  between  the  MR^l  and 
MR-3  flights  which  are  of  significance  to  the  astro- 
naut's activities  can  be  noted.  First,  spacecraft  no. 
11  (MR^l)  differed  from  spacecraft  no.  7  (MR-3) 
in  that  spacecraft  no.  11  had  available  the  center- 
line  window  which  permits  a  view  directly  in  front 
of  the  spacecraft.  Through  this  window,  the  astro- 
naut is  able  to  see  33°  in  a  vertical  direction  and 
approximately  30°  horizontally.  With  the  space- 
craft in  the  orbit  attitude,  which  is  —34°  with  the 
small  end  down,  two-thirds  of  the  window  is  filled 
with  the  earth's  surface  and  the  upper  one-third 
views  space  above  the  horizon.  The  size  and  loca- 
tion of  this  window  provided  an  opportunity  for 
better  examination  of  the  earth's  surface  and  ho- 
rizon than  was  possible  through  the  10-inch-diam- 
eter  porthole  available  to  Astronaut  Shepard.  The 
second  variation  from  the  MR-3  flight  was  in  the 
checkout  of  the  various  reaction-control  systems 
(RCS).  During  the  MR-3  flight,  Astronaut  Shep- 
ard made  use  of  the  manual  proportional  and  the 
fly-by-wire  control  systems,  whereas  during  the 
MR^  flight,  Astronaut  Grissom  made  use  of  the 
manual  proportional  system  and  the  rate  command 
system. 

The  third  variation  between  the  MR-3  and  MR-4 
flights  was  a  slight  reduction  in  the  number  of  flight 
activities  following  the  retrofire  period  on  the  MR^f 
flight.  The  flight  programs  for  Astronaut  Shepard 
and  Astronaut  Grissom  are  compared  in  figure  6-1. 
Each  begins  with  essentially  the  same  launch  period 
during  which  the  astronaut  monitors  the  sequential 
events  and  reports  the  status  of  the  onboard  systems 
approximately  every  30  seconds.  In  both  flights, 
the  turnaround  maneuver  was  performed  on  the  au- 
topilot with  the  astronaut  monitoring  the  autopilot 
action.  Immediately  after  the  turnaround,  both  As- 
tronaut Shepard  and  Astronaut  Grissom  selected  the 


33 


CONTROL  SYSTEM  IN  OPERATION 


MR-4 

A.S 

c  s| 

Hi  P.  | 

R  5  C  5 

MR-3 

A.S.  |    1    j   2  | 
CS.    AXIS  AXES 

M.  P.  | 

F.  B.  W. 

1         A.SCS.        |      M.P.  l 
1  1 

m.  <f  -  M.  v. 
PRIMARY  REFERENCE  SYSTEM 

A.  S.  C.  S-  -  AUTOMATIC  STABILIZATION  AND  CONTROL  SYSTEM 
MP  -  MANUAL  PROPORTIONAL 

R.  S,  C  S 
F.  B.  W.  - 

FLY  BY  WIRE 

MR-4 

INSTRUMENTS                    _  WINDOW 

1 

INSTRUMENTS 

MR-3 

INSTRUMENTS 

1          PERISCOPE  1 

INSTRUMENTS 

1 

ATTITUDE  SUMMARY  MR-3 


ALL  NORMAL  MANUAL  ATTITUDE  CHANGES  ARE  MADE  AT  4°  PER  SEC 


ROLL 


2:55 
IN 
ORBIT 


3:10 


1:50 
ON 

s:ope 


ATTITUDE  SUMMARY  MR-4 
PITCH   hO  -M° 


YAW 


-  0 

-34° 

-14 

0 

-34° 

0 

— w 

-20° 

 V_/  

-20° 

RFJROF I  RE 


4:41       4:56       5:11  : 

RETRO-  IN  RETR0- 
SEO.    RETRO  FIRE 


5:33  5:40 
END   F.  B.  W. 
RETRO 


2:50  3:00 
IN 
RETRO 


w 

-20° 

\ 

/ 

-45° 

\__/ 

-2')° 

4:00 
WINDOW 
REFERENCE 


RETRO- 
FIRE 


4:30  4:45 
TO  RETRO 
RETRC  SEQUENCE 


5:10 
RETRO- 
FIRE 


5:33 
END  RETRO 
TO  A.  S.  C.  S. 


/ 


+40° 


-20" 

6:20     6:35  ML 
TO  IN  SCOPE 

REENTRY  REENTRY  RETRACT 


6:10 
RETROS 
JETT. 


6:40 
SCOPE 
RETRACT 


7:40 
.05g 


A.  S.  C.  S. 

«40» 

/ 

-34° 

Fit  lre  6-1.  Manual  control  summary  for  the  MR-3  and  MR^i  flights. 


manual  proportional  control  mode  and  attempted  to 
make  a  series  of  maneuvers :  one  each  in  pitch,  yaw, 
and  roll  using  the  spacecraft  attitude  and  rate  indi- 
cator as  a  reference.  After  these  three  basic  ma- 
neuvers, the  astronaut  shifted  to  an  external 
reference.  During  this  period.  Shepard  used  the 
periscope,  whereas  Grissorr.  used  the  window.  Each 
reported  what  could  be  seen  through  these  observa- 
tion systems.  In  addition,  Grissom  made  a  60°  left 
yaw  manuever  to  the  south. 

Following  this  period  on  external  reference,  the 
retrofire  maneuver  started.  This  maneuver  com- 
menced with  the  countdown  from  the  ground  to  the 
retrosequence.  From  the  retrosequence  to  the  start 
of  retrofire,  there  is  a  30-second  period  during  which 
the  astronaut  brings  the  vehicle  into  the  proper  at- 
titude for  retrofiring.  This  is  followed  by  a  retro- 
rocket  firing  period  of  approximately  20  seconds. 
Both  Astronaut  Grissom  and  Astronaut  Shepard 
controlled  the  spacecraft  attitude  during  this  period 


using  the  instrument  reference  and  the  manual  pro- 
portional control  system. 

Following  retrofire,  Astronaut  Shepard  attempted 
to  do  a  series  of  maneuvers  using  the  fly-by-wire 
system  and  the  spacecraft  instruments  as  a  refer- 
ence. This  series  of  maneuvers  was  omitted  for 
Astronaut  Grissom's  flight;  instead,  he  switched  to 
the  rate  command  system  and  returned  to  the 
window  reference  for  further  external  observations. 
During  this  period  both  Astronaut  Shepard  and 
Astronaut  Grissom  made  a  check  of  the  HF  com- 
munications radio  system. 

The  next  mission  phase  began  at  approximately 
T  +  6  minutes  40  seconds  with  the  astronaut  pitch- 
ing up  to  reentry  attitude.  At  this  point,  both 
Astronaut  Shepard  and  Astronaut  Grissom  looked 
for  stars,  Shepard  using  the  small  porthole  on  his 
left  and  Grissom  using  the  large  centerline  window. 
Neither  astronaut  was  able  to  see  any  stars  at  this 
time. 


34 


Following  this  period  of  observation,  the  reentry 
l~"  "n.  Astronaut  Shepard  used  the  manual  pro- 
nal  control  mode  and  rate  instruments  to 
t.  *ol  the  reentry;  whereas  Grissom  used  the  rate 
command  control  mode  and  rate  instruments  during 
this  period.  Since  the  reentry  oscillations  caused 
no  discomfort  or  concern,  little  control  was  exer- 
cised by  either  astronaut. 

Although  Astronaut  Grissom  had  been  relieved 
of  some  of  the  attitude  maneuvers  that  were  required 
of  Astronaut  Shepard  between  the  retrofire  and  the 
reentry  period,  his  program  was  still  a  full  one. 
These  full  programs  resulted  from  the  decision  to 
make  maximum  use  of  the  short  weightless  flight 
time  available  during  the  Redstone  missions. 

Attitude  Control 

The  curves  of  figure  6-2  are  the  attitudes  of  pitch, 
yaw,  and  roll  maintained  by  Astronaut  Grissom 
throughout  the  flight.  The  shaded  area  in  the  back- 
ground indicates  the  envelope  of  attitudes  main- 
tained during  10  Mercury  procedures  trainer  runs 
the  week  prior  to  the  MR— 4  flight.  As  described 
in  paper  2  of  this  volume,  there  was  a  malfunction 
of  the  manual  proportional  control  system.  This 
malfunction  resulted  in  Astronaut  Grissom  s  receiv- 
ing less  than  the  normal  amount  of  thrust  per  control 

,r  deflection.  This  anomaly  in  the  performance 
;  manual  proportional  control  system  resulted 

.ie  first  three  maneuvers  being  performed  some- 
what differently  from  those  on  the  trainer,  though 
generally  still  within  the  envelope  of  the  trainer 
runs.  The  pitch  and  yaw  maneuvers  overshot  the 
20°  desired  attitude,  and  the  time  to  make  each 
maneuver  was  somewhat  increased.  This  longer 
maneuvering  time  in  pitch  and  yaw,  plus  the  time 
required  to  remove  residual  roll  rates,  prevented 


the  attempt  to  make  the  roll  maneuver.  It  is  inter- 
esting to  note  that  Astronaut  Shepard  on  his  flight 
was  also  pressed  for  time  at  this  point  and  cut  the 
roll  maneuver  short,  rolling  only  12°  instead  of  20°. 
Following  these  three  attitude  maneuvers,  Astronaut 
Grissom  made  a  left  yaw  maneuver  of  approxi- 
mately 60°,  using  the  manual  proportional  control 
mode  and  window  reference.  This  maneuver  was 
performed  approximately  as  it  was  during  the 
trainer  sessions. 

Both  Grissom  and  Shepard  maintained  the  at- 
titude of  the  spacecraft  manually  during  the  firing 
of  the  retrorockets.  During  the  critical  period  of 
approximately  20  seconds  in  which  the  retrorockets 
were  firing,  the  attitudes  were  held  very  close  to  the 
proper  retroattitude  of  0°  in  roll  and  yaw  and  —  34° 
in  pitch.  The  accuracy  with  which  Astronaut  Gris- 
som held  these  attitudes  is  shown  by  the  curves  in 
figure  6-3  with  the  envelope  of  trainer  runs  in  the 
background.  The  permissible  attitude  limits  inside 
of  which  the  retrorockets  can  be  fired  are  shown  as 
the  extents  of  the  ordinate  scale  labels.  Outside  of 
these  limits,  the  retrorocket  firing  sequence  would 
be  interrupted  until  all  the  attitudes  returned  to 
within  the  permissible  limits.  Attitude  control 
performance  during  this  period  was  well  within 
the  limits  required  for  a  safe  landing  from  orbit 
in  the  planned  recovery  area.  The  pilot  stated 
during  the  debriefing  that  controlling  attitude 
during  the  retrofire  for  the  MR-4  flight  appeared 
to  be  about  equal  in  difficulty  to  the  procedures 
trainer.  For  the  training  runs,  using  the  fixed- 
base  trainer,  retrorocket-misalinement  levels  were 
selected  which  simulated  misalinement  torques 
equal  to  approximately  60  percent  of  the  available 
reaction  control  system  control  torque.  Since 
it   is   not  possible   to    measure   the  retrorocket- 





is       yxi       5»      im       Tm      T»       Ild      tSi      wo       135      itc       s-a.      s-it      s?5       ?55      53i  Tto- 

■'iW  WJN'SEC 


c.t        l-B        icX  ts 


:JC         ':JC  :.50 


Figure  6-2.  The  MR-4  flight  attitudes  with  four  trainer  runs  in  the  background. 


35 


-46.5  r- 

PERMI  SSI  BLE 

PITCH,       -340  - 
DEG 

-2L51- 


-30, — 


PERMISSIBLE 

YAW  0 
OEG 


PERMISSIBLE 
ROLL,  0 
DEG 


+30 1 — 


RETRO 


MO. 


05:03.6 


re™ 

NO.  2 

05:13.3 


RETRO 
NO.  3 


mm? 


J  L  L 


5:05 


l    l  l 


5:10 


I       I  i 


5:i5 


'//////////  ENVELOPE  OF  4  PROCEDURES  TROVER  Rj\|S 


5:20 


5:25 


5:30 


5:35 


Figi 'he  6-3.  Attitude  control  during  MR-4  retrofire  period. 


misalinement  torques  actually  encountered  during 
the  flight,  the  performance  of  the  system  and  of  the 
pilot  cannot  be  evaluated  iti  detail.  In  addition,  the 
pilot's  assessment  of  the  retrofire  difficulty  level  may 
be  a  result  of  reduced  effectiveness  of  the  manual 
proportional  control  system,  rather  than  large  retro- 
roeket-mislinement  torque  levels. 

Following  the  retrofire  period.  Astronaut  Gris- 
som  shifted  to  the  rate  conmand  control  and  main- 
tained the  spacecraft  attitude  at  —34°  pitch  and  0C 
roll  and  yaw  until  T  +  6  minutes  34  seconds,  at  which 
time  he  pitched  to  the  proper  reentry  attitude.  The 
attitude  control  during  this,  period  is  well  within  the 
envelope  demonstrated  during  the  fixed-base  trainer 
runs.  During  the  rentry,  :he  pilot  made  use  of  the 
rate  command  system,  waich  provides  automatic 
rate  damping  to  ±3  deg  sec  if  the  stick  is  main- 
tained in  the  center  position.  This  system  appeared 
to  work  well  and  no  control  action  was  required  of 
the  pilot  to  damp  rates. 

In  summary,  the  pilot  was  able  to  accomplish  the 
majority  of  the  planned  attitude  maneuvers,  despite 


the  malfunction  of  the  conLrol  system.  This  fact, 
together  with  the  excellent  control  performance  dur- 
ing the  critical  retrofire  portion  of  the  mission,  pro- 
vides an  indication  that  pilot's  control  performance 
was  not  degraded  during  the  approximated  5 
minutes  of  weightless  flight. 

Flight  Voice  Communications 

Ninety-four  voice  communications  were  made  by 
Astronaut  Grissom  between  lift-off  and  impact. 
(See  appendix.)  As  in  Astronaut  Shepard's  flight, 
these  voice  communications  provide  an  indication 
of  how  well  the  astronaut  was  able  to  keep  up  with 
the  mission  events,  how  accurately  he  was  able  to 
read  his  cockpit  instruments,  and  how  well  he  was 
able  to  respond  to  novel  and  unusual  events  during 
the  flight.  In  general,  the  astronaut  made  all  of  the 
normal  reports  during  the  launch  and  reentry  at 
the  times  appropriate  to  the  event.  His  instrument 
readings  relayed  to  the  ground  showed  general  agree- 
ment with  telemetered  data.  In  addition  to  the 
standard  voice  reports  of  spacecraft  events  and  i"- 


36 


strument  readings.  Astronaut  Grissom  made  a  num- 
l  c  unscheduled  reports  of  the  unique  events  of 
,'ht.  He  reported  and  described  the  unique 
vik«  through  the  centerline  window  and  the  prob- 
lem with  the  attitude  control  system. 

Pilot  Observations 

The  major  sensory  observations  made  by  the 
pilots  during  the  MR-3  and  MR-4  flights  were  those 
of  vision,  auditorv  phenomena,  vibration,  angular 
acceleration,  linear  acceleration,  weightlessness,  and 
general  orientation. 

Vision 

On  the  MR— I  flight.  Astronaut  Grissom  used  the 
centerline  window  for  the  bulk  of  his  external  ob- 
servations, whereas  Astronaut  Shepard  primarily 
used  the  periscope.  The  major  areas  of  observation 
are  listed  as  follows: 

Earth's  surface. — Astronaut  Grissom  was  ham- 
pered in  his  attempts  to  identify  land  areas  due  to 
extensive  cloud  coverage.  He  was,  however,  able 
to  make  some  observations  as  evidenced  by  the  fol- 
lowing quotations  from  the  postflight  debriefing 
sessions:  "".  .  .  The  Cape  is  the  best  reference  I 
had.  ...  I  could  pick  out  the  Banana  River  and 
see  the  peninsula  that  runs  on  down  south,  and  then 
vn  the  coast  of  Florida.  I  saw  what  must  have 
West  Palm  Beach  .  .  .  and  it  was  a  dark 
brown  color  and  quite  large.  I  never  did  see  Cuba. 
High  cirrus  blotted  out  everything  except  an  area 
from  about  Davtona  Beach  back  inland  to  Orlando 
and  Lakeland  to  Lake  Okeechobee  and  down  to  the 
tip  of  Florida.  Be\ond  this  the  Gulf  of  Mexico 
was  visible." 

Astronaut  Shepard  was  less  hampered  by  cloud 
formations  during  his  flight.  His  observations 
through  the  periscope  were  reported  as  follows  in 
the  postflight  debriefing  sessions:  '".  .  .  The  west 
coast  of  Florida  arid  the  Gulf  coast  were  clear.  I 
could  see  Lake  Okeechobee.  I  could  see  the  shoals 
in  the  vicinitv  of  Bimini.  I  could  see  Andros  Is- 
land .  .  .  Tampa  Bay.  .  .  .  There  was  an  abrupt 
color  change?  between  the  reefs,  in  the  area  of  Bimini 
and  the  surrounding  water/' 

Clouds. — Because  of  shortage  of  time  and/or 
high  cirrus  clouds  that  obscured  any  underlying 
vertical  cloud  formations,  neither  Astronaut  Shep- 
ard nor  Astronaut  Grissom  was  able  to  report  cloud 
I-  '  his  during  the  MR-3  and  MR-4  flights. 


Horizon. — Astronaut  Grissom  described  the  hori- 
zon as  "verv  smooth  as  far  as  I  could  see  ...  a 
blue  band  above  the  earth,  then  the  dark  skv.  It 
is  very  vivid  when  you  go  from  the  blue  to  the 
dark.  .  .  .  The  blue  band  appears  about  a  quarter 
of  an  inch  wide." 

Astronaut  Shepard  viewed  the  horizon  through 
the  small  10-inch-diameter  porthole.  He  described 
bis  view  as  follows:  ".  .  .  There  was  only  one  haze 
layer  between  the  cloud  cover  and  the  deep  blue.  .  .  . 
ft  was  a  little  hazy,  or  what  looked  like  haze;  so  there 
was  no  real  sharp  definition  between  clouds,  haze 
layer,  or  the  horizon  and  skv. 

Sky. — Astronaut  Grissom  reported  that  the  skv 
was  verv  black  and  that  the  transition  from  blue  to 
black  was  very  rapid  during  the  launch  phase. 

Astronaut  Shepard  on  the  MR-3  llight  had  the 
impression  that  the  skv  was  a  very  dark  blue  rather 
than  black. 

Stars. — The  high  contrast  between  the  cabin  in- 
terior light  intensity  and  external  areas  for  both 
suborbital  flights  made  it  verv  difficult  for  either 
pilot  to  locate  stars.  Astronaut  Shephard  did  not 
see  any  stars  during  his  flight.  Astronaut  Grissom 
was  not  able  to  locate  any  stars  during  the  scheduled 
external  observation  period  of  his  flight;  however,  he 
did  locate  what  appeared  to  be  a  star  late  in  the 
powered  phase  of  the  llight.  Subsequent  investiga- 
tions indicate  that  he  saw  the  planet  Venus. 

Sun. — The  sun  never  posed  a  great  problem  for 
either  of  the  astronauts  during  the  suborbital  mis- 
sions. It  entered  the  cabin  either  directly  or  reflected 
during  both  (lights,  I  nlike  Shepard.  Astronaut 
Grissom  did  have  some  minor  difficulties  with  sun- 
light. His  statements  were:  "The  sun  was  coming 
in  bright  at  0.05g  and  I  think  I  would  have  missed  it 
if  I  hadn't  known  that  it  was  due  and  coming 
up.  ...  I  looked  real  close  and  I  did  see  it.  .  .  . 
It  conies  in  pretty  much  as  a  shaft  of  light  with  every- 
thing else  in  the  cockpit  dark, 

L  se  of  earth  reference  for  attitude  control. — Both 
astronauts  expressed  confidence  that  it  would  be 
possible  to  determine  rates  and  attitudes  by  the  use 
of  their  respective  available  external  reference  de- 
vices. Astronaut  Shepard  said.  "Qualitatively.  I 
noticed  nothing  that  would  prevent  it  [periscope] 
from  being  a  good  backup  for  the  instruments,  for 
attitude  reference  and  for  control. 

Astronaut  Grissomrs  comments  on  the  window  as 
a  means  of  reference  were :  "When  I  had  zero  roll 
on  the  instruments.  I  had  zero  roll  out  the  window. 
When  I  was  looking  at  the  Cape,  then  I  had  a  good 


37 


reach'  van  reference  and  then  it  [yaw  rate  |  was  quite 
apparent,  and  I  could  eont  :ol  on  that  basis. 

Other  visual  phenomenc. — Neither  pilot  was  able 
to  observe  the  launch  vehicle  at  any  time  during  the 
flights.  At  tower  separation,  the  periscope  has  not 
as  vet  extended  so  Shepard  was  not  able  to  observe 
the  tower  jettisoning.  However,  the  centerline  win- 
dow provided  Grissoin  with  a  direct  view  of  this  op- 
eration. His  comment  is  as  follows:  "I  didn't  see 
anv  (lame,  but  I  could  see  t  go  and  I  could  see  it  for 
a  long  time  after  it  went.  I  could  see  the  little  tail- 
off  and  it  occurred  to  me  that  it  went  slightly  off 
to  my  right. 

Both  pilots  were  able  to  observe  through  the  peri- 
scope some  portions  of  tht  retropackage  after  it  had 
been  jettisoned.  Astronaut  Grissom's  comment  was : 
"'Right  after  retrojettison.  I  saw  something  floating 
around.  It  actually  looked  like  a  retromotoi'  at  one 
time,  and  these  floated  by  a  couple  of  times. 

Astronaut  Shepard's  conment  was:  "I  heard  the 
noise  and  saw  a  little  hit  o:'  the  debris.  1  saw  one  of 
the  retropacks  retaining  straps. 

During  the  reentrv  phase.  Astronaut  Grissom  re- 
ported observing  what  he  describes  as  shock  waves. 
His  report  was:  "I'm  fairly  certain  it  was  shock 
waves  off  the  shield  of  th  3  capsule.  It  looked  like 
smoke  or  contrail  really,  but  I'm  pretty  certain  it 
was  shocks. 

Drogue  parachute  deployment  was  observed  by 
both  pilots.  Shepard  observed  this  event  through  the 
periscope  and  Grissom  through  the  centerline 
window.  Astronaut  Shspard  reported:  "The 
drogue  |  parachute  ]  came  out  at  the  intended  alti- 
tude and  was  clearly  visible  through  the  periscope." 

Astronaut  Grissom  observed:  "The  drogue 
[  parachute  ]  came  right  out.  I  could  see  the  canister 
go  right  on  out  and  the  drogue  deploy." 

Main  parachute  deployment  was  obvious  to  both 
pilots.  Astronaut  Grissom  was  afforded  the  best 
\  iew  of  the  parachute  through  the  centerline  window. 
Astronaut  Grissom  reported:  "1  could  see  the  com- 
plete chute  when  it  was  in  the  reefed  condition  and 
after  it  opened  I  could  ?ee.  out  the  window.  75 
percent  of  the  chute.'7 

Astronaut  Shepard's  comment  was:  "Then  at 
10.000  feet,  of  course,  the  antenna  canister  went  off. 
and  you  could  see  it  come  <  ff  and  pull  the  main  chute 
with  it  and  then  go  off  in  the  distance.  ^  ou  could  see 
the  chute  in  the  reefed  condition.  Then  it  dereefed. 
When  asked.  "Did  you  see  the  chute  at  full  infla- 
tion?'* he  replied.  "Yes.  I  vould  say  probably  three- 
fifths  of  the  chute  area :  over  half,  anyway. " 


Astronaut  Grissom  observed  the  reserve  parachute 
canister  in  the  water  through  the  periscope  af'  '* 
had  jettisoned. 

Astronaut  Grissom  was  not  able  to  locate  ai.  .1 
the  recovery  ships  or  search  aircraft.  Shepard  was 
able  to  see  the  search  aircraft  in  the  recovery  area. 
He  reported  during  the  debriefing.  'T  didn't  see  anv 
airplanes  out  the  scope  until  after  I  had  hit.  but  I 
saw  the  choppers  through  the  "scope  after  impact.* 

Auditory  Phenomena 

The  noise  encountered  by  both  pilots  did  not  at 
any  time  reach  a  disturbing  level.  The  major 
mechanical  functions  of  the  spacecraft  were  audible 
to  both  astronauts.  Their  reports  of  the  various 
functions  are  as  follows: 

Shepard  observed:  "Sounds  of  the  booster 
[launch  vehicle  |.  the  pvros  [pyrotechnics]  tiring, 
the  escape  tower  jettisoning,  and  the  retros  bring 
could  be  heard.  All  these  sounds  were  new: 
although  none  of  them  was  realv  loud  enough  to  be 
upsetting,  thev  were  definitely  noticeable.  I  remem- 
ber thinking  1  did  not  hear  the  noise  of  the  manual 
jets  firing.  I  was  aware  of  the  posigrade  firing  and 
of  just  one  general  noise  pulse. 

Grissom  reported:    "At  no  time  did  we  have  anv 
annoying  sound  level,    ^ou  can  hear  the  escape 
rocket  fire,  the  posigrades.  and  \  ou  can  hear  'lie 
retrorockets  fire  and  feel  them.    *i  ou  can  he; 
pitch  and  v  aw  jets  fire,  and  that's  about  it." 

Both  astronauts  reported  that  thev  heard  the 
retrorocket  package  jettison  and  heard  the  firinu  of 
the  drogue-parachute  mortar.  However,  only  Shep- 
ard recalled  hearing  the  antenna  mortar  firing. 

Vibration 

The  vibrations  encountered  b\  Astronaut  Grissom 
during  the  MR— 4  flight  were  less  than  those  ex- 
perienced by  Astronaut  Shepard  on  the  MR-3  flight. 
This  was  primarily  a  result  of  ill  an  improved 
fairing  between  the  spacecraft  and  the  launch  vehicle 
and  (2 1  added  sound  attenuating  material  in  the 
couch.  Vibration  was  experienced  only  during  the 
launch  phase  of  both  flights.  The  astronauts  reports 
of  the  vibrations  encountered  and  their  effects  are 
as  follows.  Shepard's  comments  were:  "'From  the 
period  of  about  45  to  50  seconds  after  lift-off  and 
through  about  a  minute  and  a  half  there  was  some 
vibration.  I  could  feel  vibrations  building  up.  and 
the  sound  level  came  up  a  little  bit  until  at  one 
point.  I'm  not  sure  whether  it  was  at  max  q  |  maxi- 
mum dynamic  pressure]  or  not.  there  wras  eno"  '" 


38 


vibration  in  the  capsule  j  spacecraft]  thai  there  wa?  a 
/  "~      f iizzv  appearance  of  the  instrument  needles. 

after  we  got  through  max  q,  everything 
smoothed  out."  The  degradation  of  vision  asso- 
ciated with  this  vibration  was  not  serious. 

Grissom  observed:  "I  called  out  vibrations  as  soon 
as  thev  started  and  they  never  did  get  very  bad  at 
all.  1  was  able  to  see  the  instrument  panel  and  see 
the  instruments  clearly  all  the  time  and  to  transmit 
quite  clearly.' 

Angular  Acceleration 

Astronaut  Grissom  reported  that  he  was  able  to 
discern  angular  accelerations  during  spacecraft  turn- 
around and  retrofire.  He  did  not  think  that  he  could 
feel  the  accelerations  produced  in  controlling  the 
spacecraft: 

Astronaut  Shepard  had  much  the  same  experience 
on  the  MR-3  flight.  He  was  also  able  to  feel  the 
angular  accelerations  during  periods  when  there 
we iv  high  torques  acting  on  the  spacecraft. 

Linear  Accelerations 

Both  pilots  were  aware  of  the  linear  accelerations 
connected  with  the  main  functions  of  the  spacecraft, 
such  as  posigrade  firing  at  spacecraft  separation, 
retrorocket  firing,  reentry,  drogue  parachute  deploy- 
s'—I. main  parachute  deployment,  and  impact.  In 
>n.  Astronaut  Grissom  was  able  to  identify  the 
anient  of  the  landing  bag.  He  stated,  'T  could 
feel  it  [the  landing-bag  deployment!,  but  it  was  just 
a  slight  jar  as  the  thing  dropped  down."1 

Astronaut  Shepard  stated  that  the  landing-bag 
shock  was  so  slight  that  he  did  not  notice  it. 

^  eiglitle^ne-s 

Both  pilots  experienced  approximately  the  same 
-ensations  during  the  weightless  phase  of  the  flight. 
The\  both  had  to  make  a  special  effort  to  notice  the 
weightless  condition.  Astronaut  Shepard  made  these 
observations  concerning  his  flight:  T  said  to  myself. 
"Well.  OK.  vou've  been  weightless  for  a  minute  or 
two  and  somebody  is  going  to  ask  you  what  it  feels 
like/  ...  In  other  words.  I  wasn't  disturbed  at  all 
by  the  fact  that  I  was  weightless.  I  noticed  a  little 
bit  of  dust  living  around,  and  there  was  one  washer 
over  iiiv  left  eye.  .  .  .  I  w  as  not  uncomfortable  and 
1  didn't  feel  like  my  performance  was  degraded  in 
anv  «av,    No  problems  at  all. 

Astronaut  Grissom's  primary  cue  to  the  weight- 
less condition  was  also  a  visual  one.  as  is  indicated 


by  his  comments  during  the  debriefing:  ".  .  .  At 
zero-g.  everything  is  floating  around,  f  could  see 
washers  and  trash  floating  around.  I  had  no  other 
feeling  of  zero-g:  in  fact.  I  felt  just  about  like  I 
did  at  Ig  on  mv  back  or  sitting  up.  ' 

General  Orientation 

Neither  pilot  experienced  any  unexpected  disori- 
entation. Astronaut  Shepard,  in  fact,  experienced 
no  disorientation  at  any  time  as  is  indicated  by  his 
statements  during  the  debriefing. 

Astronaut  Grissom.  on  the  other  hand,  experi- 
enced a  slight  pitching  forward  sensation  at  launch- 
vehicle  cutoff.  His  comment  was :  ".  .  .  Right  at 
BECO  [booster-engine  or  launch-vehicle  cutoff] 
when  the  tower  went.  I  got  a  little  tumbling  sensa- 
tion. I  can't  recall  which  way  it  was  that  I  felt  I 
tumbled,  but  I  did  get  the  same  sort  of  feeling  that 
we  had  on  the  centrifuge.  There  was  a  definite 
second  of  disorientation  there.  I  knew  what  it  was. 
so  it  didn't  bother  me."  Most  of  the  astronauts  have 
experienced  this  sensation  during  this  period  on 
dynamic  centrifuge  simulations.  Grissom  further 
commented:  'Trior  to  retrofire.  I  really  felt  that 
I  was  moving:  I  was  going  backwards.  .  .  .  When 
the  retros  fired.  I  had  the  impression  I  was  very 
definitely  going  the  other  way  . 

Training  Program  Evaluation 

The  Mercury  astronaut  training  program  was  de- 
scribed by  Astronaut  Slayton  in  the  report  on  the 
Mercury-Redstone  flight  3  i  ref.  1).  As  a  result  of 
the  two  suborbital  flights,  a  preliminary  evaluation 
of  some  portions  of  the  training  program  are  pos- 
sible. The  pilots'  comments  on  some  of  the  more 
important  phases  of  training  are  given  in  this  section. 

General  Comments 

Astronaut  Shepard  reported  that  he  felt  suffi- 
ciently trained  for  the  mission.  He  felt  that  the 
training  produced  a  ".  .  .  feeling  of  self-confidence 
as  well  as  the  phy  sical  skills  necessary  to  control  the 
yehicle."  He  did  not  believe  that  any  area?  of  train- 
ing had  been  neglected.  He  reported.  ".  .  .  that 
as  a  result  of  the  training  program,  at  no  time  during 
the  flight  did  1  run  into  anything  unexpected."' 
With  regard  to  items  in  the  training  program  which 
might  be  omitted.  Astronaut  Shepard  reported.  "All 
the  training  devices  and  phases  we  experienced  were 
valuable.''    However,  since  he  felt  that  the  physio- 


39 


logical  svmptoms  associated  with  weightlessness  and 
other  space  flight  enviror  mental  conditions  were  not 
going  to  be  a  problem,  he  believed  the  time  devoted 
to  weightless  flights  and  disorientation  devices  could 
he  reduced. 

Astronaut  Grissom  stated  after  the  flight  that  he 
felt  least  well  prepared  in  the  recovery  portion  of 
the  mission.  He  also  felt  that  additional  practice 
on  the  air-lubricated  free-attitude  trainer  during  the 
last  2  weeks  prior  to  the  mission  would  have  been 
desirable.  This  simulate r  is  at  NASA-Langley  Air 
Force  Base.  Va..  and  not  available  to  the  astronaut 
who  must  remain  close  to  the  launch  site  just  prior 
to  the  flight.  Astronaut  Grissom  also  felt  he  should 
have  had  more  time  at  the  planetarium  and  for  map 
stud\.  Like  Astronaut  Shepard,  he  did  not  feel  any 
of  the  training  phases  v  ere  unnecessary,  but  that 
the  time  on  some  trainers  could  be  reduced. 

Weightier  Flying 

Astronaut  Shepard  reported  that.  '\  .  .  The  weight- 
less flving  is  valuable  as  a  confidence-building  ma- 
neuver." Astronaut  Grissom  agreed  that  the  train- 
ing was  valuable  and  that  he  would  not  want  to  be 
without  it.  Both  reported  that  the  flights  in  the  F- 
100  airplanes  in  which  ihey  experienced  1  minute 
of  weightlessness,  while  strapped  in  the  seat,  were 
most  similar  to  their  Kedstone-Mercury  flight  ex- 
periences. Shepard  felt  that  the  amount  ol  weight- 
less flying  could  have  been  reduced. 

Fixed-Base  Procedures  Training 

Both  pilots  felt  this  was  a  very  valuable  trainer, 
particularly  when  tied  into  the  Mercury  Control 
Center  simulations.  Ast  onaut  Shepard  made  less 
use  of  the  procedures  trsiner  than  he  might  other- 
wise have  because  of  the  difference  in  the  panel 
arrangement  between  the  rainer  and  the  early  model 
of  the  spacecraft  which  he  flew.  Shepard  felt  that 
the  computer  attitude  simulation  provided  an  accu- 
rate reproduction  of  the  flight  dynamics.  Grissom 
w  as  not  able  to  make  a  good  evaluation  of  this  por- 
tion of  the  simulation  due  to  the  malfunction  of 
the  control  system  on  his  fight. 

Shepard  stressed  the  importance  of  accurate  tim- 
ing of  events  in  the  procedures  trainer,  noting  that 
a  small  time  inaccuracy  had  momentarily  disturbed 
him  during  the  flight.  Grissom  suggested  that  where 
possible,  sound  cues  associated  with  mission  events 
should  be  added  to  the  simulation. 


Air-Lubricated  Free-Altitude  Trainer 

Both  pilots  felt  that  the  air-lubricated  f 
tude  I  ALFA  I  trainer,  a  moving-base  trainei  i 
provides  angular-acceleration  cues  as  well  as  a  sim- 
ulation of  both  the  window  and  periscope  views  of 
the  earth,  was  very  good  for  developing  skill  in  the 
attitude  control  task.  It  was  more  valuable  to  Gris- 
som since  the  spacecraft  he  flew  had  the  centerline 
window.  The  angular  response  of  the  ALFA  trainer 
appeared  to  be  accurate  to  Shepard  and  he  felt  that 
this  trainer  was  a  necessarv  addition  to  the  fixed- 
base  training.  As  already  noted.  Astronaut  Gris- 
som fell  that  more  practice  in  the  ALFA  trainer 
with  the  pilot  using  the  window  reference  would 
have  been  desirable.  He  felt  that  the  horizon  sim- 
ulation which,  at  present,  is  only  an  illuminated 
band  should  be  improved.  Both  pilots  reported 
that  the  simulated  periscope  view  employing  a  pro- 
jected earth  map  was  very  valuable. 

Centrifuge 

Hoth  pilots  felt  that  the  centrifuge  provided  val- 
uable training  for  launch  and  reentry  periods. 
Shepard  reported  that  simulated  accelerations  of 
the  centrifuge  during  retrofiring  were  far  more 
jerky  and  upsetting  than  those  occurring  during  the 
flight.  ".  .  .  which  were  very  smooth.7'  Grissom 
agreed  that  the  flight  accelerations  were  smc 
he  felt  that  the  centrifuge  simulations  were 
difficult  than  the  flight.  The  centrifuge  had  pre- 
pared him  for  a  slight  momentary  vertigo  sensation 
which  he  experienced  just  after  cutoff  of  the  launch- 
vehicle  engine. 

Participation  in  Spacecraft  Checkout  Activities  at  the 
Launch  Site 

Both  pilots  felt  that  this  portion  of  their  prepara- 
tion was  particularly  essential.  During  this  period, 
they  were  able  to  familiarize  themselves  with  the 
unique  features  of  the  actual  spacecraft  they  were  to 
fly.  Grissom  summed  up  the  value  of  this  training 
as  follows:  'Tt  is  good  to  get  into  the  flight  capsule 
[spacecraft]  a  number  of  times:  then  on  launch  dav. 
you  have  no  feeling  of  sitting  on  top  of  a  booster 
[launch  vehicle]  ready  for  launch.  You  feel  as  if 
you  were  back  in  the  checkout  hangar — this  is  home, 
the  surroundings  are  familiar,  you  are  at  ease.  You 
cannot  achiev  e  this  feeling  of  familiarity  in  the  pro- 
cedures trainer  because  there  are  inevitably  many 
small  differences  between  the  simulator  and  the 
capsule  [spacecraft]."' 


40 


APPENDIX 


Air-Ground  Communications  for  MR— 4- 


The  following  table  gives  a  verbatim  transcrip- 
tion of  the  communications  between  the  spacecraft 
and  the  ground  during  the  MR— 4  flight.  The  call 
signs  listed  in  the  second  column  identify  different 
elements  of  the  operation.  The  spacecraft  is  iden- 
tified as  "Rell  7"  for  Liberty  Bell  7.  The  astronaut 
communicator  in  the  Blockhouse  is  identified  as 
"Stony. '"(Jap  Com''  is  the  astronaut  communi- 
cator in  the  Mercury  Control  Center.  "Chase"  is  an 


astronaut  in  an  F— 106  airplane.  ''ATS  '  stands  for 
the  '"Atlantic  Ocean  Ship."  a  Mercury  range  station 
aboard  a  ship  which  had  been  moved  in  close  to 
the  landing  area  for  this  flight.  ''Hunt  Club "  is  the 
designation  given  to  the  recovery  helicopters. 
"Card  File"  is  the  designation  of  a  radio-relay  air- 
plane which  relayed  the  spacecraft  communications 
to  the  Mercury  Control  Center. 


(  jtm  muni- 
ration 
numluT 


Cuiwnitni- 
entur 

S  t  <  1 1 1  y 
Bell  7 
( ."ap  ( loin 
Bell  7 

( lap  ( 
Bell  7 


Time, 

0:01 
0:0.1 
0:08 
0:1  1 
0:18 
0:20 
0:21.  5 
0:28 


Trans- 
mission 
dura- 
tion, 
sec 

1 

t.  .> 

3 

1.  5 

2.  5 
L 

I.  5 
8.  5 


( 'ap  ( 'om 

0:36.  5 

2.  5 

t 

Hell  7 

0:39 

■3 

0) 

0:5  J 

6.5 

5 

licll  7 

1  :01.5 

6.5 

1 :08.5 

0.  5 

< 'ap  ( !om 

1:09 

1 

0 

Hell  : 

1:10 

0.  5 

( iap  ( ]oiii 

1:11 

Bell  7 

1:13 

9.  5 

H 

liell  7 

1:23 

0.  5 

(.om 

1:23.5 

0.  5 

<1 

Bell  7 

1:24 

1.  5 

(.ap  Com 

1:26 

3 

10 

Bell  7 

1:29 

1.  5 

1:31 

15.  5 

( lap  (.om 

1 :46.5 

3 

1  1 

Bell  7 

1:49.5 

3 

1:56 

18.  5 

1  ( Jonimuiiicator  uniden 

lified. 

(_A>mmu!iication 

1  if t -off. 

Ah,  Roger.    This  is  Liberty  Bell  7.    The  clock  is  operating. 
I, oud  and  clear,  Jose,  don't  cry  too  much. 
Oke-<ioke. 

OK,  it's  a  nice  ride  up  to  now. 
Lnud  and  clear. 
Roger. 

OK.     The  fuel  is  go;  about  l'a  g's;  cabin  pressure  is  just  coming  off 

the  peg:  the  (h  is  go;  we  have  26  amps. 
Roger.    Pitch  [attitude]  88  [degrees],  the  trajectory  is  good. 
Roger,  looks  good  here. 

OK,  there.     We're  starting  to  pick  up  a  little  bit  of  the  noise  and 

vibration:  not  bad,  though,  at  all.    50  sees.,  more  vibration. 
OK.    The  fuel  is  go;  l'i  g's;  cabin  is  8  [psi]:  the  0j  is  go;  27  amps. 
\nd  [Rest  of  communication  not  received.] 
Pitch  is  |Rest  of  communicat ion  not  received.] 
l[gl,  5'g]  |Rest  of  communication  not  received.! 
Pitch  [atlitudcj  >s  77  [degrees];  trajectory  is  go. 

Roger.     Cabin  pressure  is  still  about  6  [psi[  and  dropping  slightly. 

Looks  like  she's  going  to  hold  about  5.5  [psi]. 
Eh  |Rest  of  communication  not  received.] 
Cabin  [Rest  of  communication  not  received. | 
Believe  me,  Oi  is  go. 
Cabin  pressure  holding  5.5  [psi!. 
Roger,  roger. 

This  is  Liberty  Bell  7.  Fuel  is  go;  2*2  g"#;  cabin  pressure  5.5:  02  is  go; 
main  [hus[  25  [volts],  isolated — ah,  isolated  [bus!  is  28  [volts1, 
ft  e  are  go. 

Roger,    Pilch  |atlitutle]  is  62  [degrees!;  trajectory  is  go. 
Roger.     It  looks  good  in  here. 

Everything  is  good;  cabin  pressure  is  holding;  suit  pressure  is  OK: 
2  minutes  and  we  got  4  g's;  fuel  is  go:  ah,  feel  the  hand  controller 
move  just  a  hair  there:  cabin  pressure  is  holding,  O2  is  go;  25  amps. 


41 


Trans  - 
mission 

C.ommun  i-  dura- 


CfltlOll 

C^Qnl  fn  tin  I  - 

tlOJl . 

number 

rator 

min:ser 

sec 

Cap  Com 

2:15 

1.  5 

12 

Bell  7 

2:16.5 

0.  05 

C*ip  Com 

2:17 

1.  5 

L3 

Bell  7 

2:23 

2 

Chase  1 

2:24.5 

1.  5 

it 

Bell  7 

2:26 

4 

Cilp  Colli 

2:31.5 

ft  ^ 
\f.  o 

15 

Bell  7 

2:33 

9.  5 

Cap  Com 

2:42.5 

4.5 

16 

Bell  7 

2:47 

13.  5 

Cap  Com 

3:01 

0.  5 

17 

Bell  7 

3:02 

8.  0 

Cap  Com 

3:10.5 

3.5 

18 

Bell  7 

3:15.5 

3 

Cap  Com 

3:20.5 

4 

19 

Bell  7 

3:24.5 

3 

Cap  Com 

3:28 

0.5 

20 

Bell  7 

3:31 

4 

Cap  Com 

3:36 

3 

21 

Bell  7 

3:40.5 

3 

22 

Bell  7 

3:45 

1.4 

Cap  Com 

3:47.5 

1.  5 

lieil  4 

1 

24 

Bell  7 

3:51.5 

4 

Cap  Com 

3:57.5 

2 

25 

Bell  7 

3:59.5 

2 

26 

Bell  7 

4:02 

12 

Cap  Com 

4:15 

3.5 

27 

Bell  7 

4:18.5 

5.5 

Cap  Com 

4:25 

1.5 

28 

Bell  7 

4:29.5 

Cap  Com 

4:30.5 

1.5 

(■) 

4:33 

4.5 

29 

Bell  7 

4:37.5 

3.5 

Cap  Com 

4:42 

2 

30 

Bell  7 

4:44 

4 

Cap  Com 

4:48 

3.5 

31 

Bell  7 

4:52 

4 

Cap  Com 

4:57 

3.5 

32 

Bell  7 

5:01.5 

2.  5 

Cap  Com 

5:05 

6 

(') 

Communicator  imiden lifted. 


Comm  unication 

Roger,  we  have  go  here. 
And  I  see  a  star! 
Stand  by  for  cutoff. 
There  went  the  tower. 

Roger,  there  went  the  tower,  affirmative  Chase. 

Roger,  squibs  are  off. 

Roger. 

There  went  posigrades,  capsule  has  separated.    We  are  at  zero  g  and 

turning  around  and  the  sun  is  really  bright. 
Roger,  cap.  sep.  [capsule  separation  light]  is  green;  turnaround  has 

started,  manual  handle  out. 
Oh  boy!    Manual  handle  is  out;  the  sky  is  very  black;  the  capsule  is 

coining  around  into  orbit  attitude;  the  roll  is  a  little  bit  slow. 
Roger. 

I  haven't  seen  a  booster  anyplace.  OK,  rate  command  is  coming  on. 
I'm  in  orbit  attitude,  I'm  pitching  up.  OK,  40  [Rest  of  communi- 
cation not  received.]    Wait,  I've  lost  some  roll  here  someplace. 

Roger,  rate  command  is  coming  on.    You're  trying  manual  pilch. 

OK,  I  got  roll  back.    OK,  I'm  at  24  [degrees]  in  pitch. 

Roger,  your  IP  [impact  point]  is  right  on,  Gus,  right  on. 

OK.  I'm  having  a  little  trouble  with  rate,  ah,  with  the  Miami, il  con- 
trol. 

Roger. 

If  I  can  get  her  stabilized  here,  all  axes  are  working  all  right. 

Roger.     Understand  manual  control  is  good. 

Roger,  it's — it's  sort  of  sluggish,  more  than  1  expected. 

OK,  I'm  yawing. 

Roger,  yaw. 

Left,  ah. 

OK,  coming  back  in  yaw.     I'm  a  little  bit  late  there, 

Roger.    Reading  you  loud  and  clear,  Gus. 

Lot  of  stuff — there's  a  lot  of  stuff  floating  around  up  here. 

OK,  I'm  going  to  skip  the  yaw  [maneuver],  ah,  or  [rather  the]  roll 

[maneuver]  because  I'm  a  little  bit  late  and  I'm  going  to  try  this 

rough  yaw  maneuver.    About  all  I  can  really  see  is  clouds.  I 

haven't  seen  any  land  anyplace  yet. 
Roger,  you're  on  the  window.    Are  you  trying  a  yaw  maneuver? 
I'm  trying  the  yaw  maneuver  and  I'm  on  the  window.     It's  such  a 

fascinating  view  out  the  window  you  just  ean't  help  but  look  out 

that  way. 
I  understand. 

You  su,  ah,  really.    There  I  see  the  coast,  I  see. 
4  +  30  [elapsed  time  since  launch]  Gus. 

4  +  30  [elapsed  time  since  launch]  he's  looking  out  the  window,  A— OK. 
I  can  see  the  coast  but  I  can't  identify  anything. 
Roger,  4-}-30  [elapsed  time  since  launch]  Gus. 

OK,  let  me  get  back  here  to  retro  attitude,  retro  sequence  has  started. 

Roger,  retro  sequence  has  started.    Go  to  retro  attitude. 

Right,  we'll  see  if  I'm  in  bad,  not  in  very  good  shape  here. 

Got  15  seconds,  plenty  of  time,  I'll  give  you  a  mark  at  5:10  [elapsed 

time  since  launch], 
OK,  retro  attitude  [light]  is  still  green. 
Retros  on  my-  mark,  3,  2,  1,  murk. 

He's  in  limits.    [Falls  in  the  middle  of  last  Cap  Com  communication.] 


42 


Trans- 

_  mission 
(  >ji-  dura- 


Communi- 

Time, 

Hon, 

T 

cator 

min:sec 

sec 

33 

Bell  7 

5:11,5 

^  ) 

5:12 

1 

(jflp  Coin 

5:13.5 

1 

31 

Bell  7 

5:19 

o 

Cap  Com 

5:21 

2.  5 

lioll  7 

5:23.5 

X 

Bell  7 

5:25.5 

2.  5 

Cap  Com 

3 

1 T 
O  i 

Hell  7 

5:33.5 

38 

Bell  7 

5:36 

1.5 

Cap  Com 

5:38 

3 

39 

Bell  7 

5:41 

3 

Cap  Com 

5:11.5 

1.5 

5:52 

6.  S 

0) 

K) 

Bell  7 

6:08 

18 

Cap  Coin 

6:05 

6 

ll 

Bell  7 

6:34 

3.  5 

( jap  Coin 

6:38 

1.  5 

1-1 

1-1*11  " 

6:41 

3.  5 

Cap  Coin 

6: 17 

4.  5 

Bell  7 

6:51.5 

1 

Cap  Corn 

6:56.5 

3.5 

i4 

Bell  7 

7:00.5 

3 

15 

Bell  7 

7:05.5 

0.  5 

l"  '1  T  k   I  fiTTI 

7:07 

2.  5 

16 

Bell  7 

7:09.5 

1 

1    Oft  1  sim 

7:14.5 

;j 

C- *i  p  t^oni 

7:27 

2.  5 

1 i 

Bell  7 

7:30 

3.  5 

Csp  Coiti 

7:33.5 

-K> 

Bell  7 

7:37 

2 

Ilt.ll  7 

3 

— .  j 

Cap  Com 

7:57 

1 

50 

Bell  7 

8:03.5 

.} 

Cup  Co ni 

8:09 

1 . 5 

51 

Bell  7 

8:11 

5 

52 

Bell  7 

8:17 

1.5 

53 

Bell  7 

8:19 

1 1.  5 

Cap  Com 

8:32 

2 

51 

Bell  7 

8:31.5 

3 

Cap  Com 

8:38.5 

1.5 

55 

Hell  7 

8:42 

7.  5 

Cap  Com 

8:49.5 

2.5 

1  Communicator  unidentified. 


Communication 

OK,  there's  1  firing,  there's  1  firing. 
Retro  1.     [Cuts  out  Bell  7.] 
Roger,  retro  I. 

There's  2  firing,  nice  little  boost.    There  went  3. 
Roger,  3,  all  retros  are  fireil. 
Roger,  roger. 

OK,  yell,  they're  fired  out  right  there. 
Roger,  retrojettison  armed. 

Retrojetlison  is  armed,  retrojettison  is  armed,  going  to  rate  com- 
mand. 

OK,  I'm  going  to  switch. 

Roger.  Understand  manual  fuel  handle  is  in. 
Manual  fuel  handle  is  in,  mark,  going  to  HF. 
Roger,  HF. 

Liberty  Bell  7,  this  is  Cap  Com  on  HF,  1,  2,  3,  4,  5.    How  do  you 

read  [Bell]  7? 
I  got  you. 

.  .  .  here,  do  you  read  me,  do  you  read  me  on  HF?  .  .  .  Going 
back  to  U  [UHF]  .  .  .  [received  by  ATS  ship].  Boy  is  that  .  .  . 
Retro,  I'm  back  on  UHF  and,  ah,  and  the  jett — the  retros  have 
jettisoned.  Now  I  can  see  the  Cape  and,  oh  boy,  that's  some  sight. 
I  can't  see  too  much. 

This  is  Cap  Com  on  HF,  1,  2,  3,  4,  5.    How  do  you  read  [Bell]  7? 

Roger,  I  am  on  UHF  high,  do  you  read  me? 

Roger,  reading  you  loud  and  clear  UHF  high,  can  you  confirm  retro- 
jettison? 

OK,  periscope  is  retracting,  going  to  reentry  attitude. 

Roger.    Retros  have  jettisoned,  scope  has  retracted,  you're  going  to 

reentry  attitude. 
Affirmative. 

Bell  7  from  Cap  Com,  your  IF  [impact  point]  is  right  on. 

Roger,     I'm  in  reentry  attitude. 

Ah. 

Roger,  how  does  it  look  out  the  window  now? 

Ah,  the  sun  is  coming  in  and  so  all  I  can  see  really  is  just,  ah,  just 

darkness,  the  sky  is  very  black. 
Roger,  you  have  some  more  time  to  look  if  you  like. 
[Bell]  7  from  Cap  Com,  how  do  you  feel  up  there? 
1  feci  very  good,  auto  fuel  is  90  [percent],  manual  is  50  [percent], 
Roger,  0.05g  in  10  [seconds  . 
OK. 

OK,  everything  is  very  good,  ah. 

I  got  0.05g  [light]  and  roll  rate  has  started. 

Roger. 

Got  a  pitch  rate  in  here,  OK,  g's  are  starting  lo  build. 
Roger,  reading  you  loud  and  clear. 
Roger,  g's  are  building,  we're  up  to  6[g[. 
There's  9[gl. 

There's  about  10[g|;  the  handle  is  out  from  under  it;  here  I  got  a  little 

pitch  rate  coming  back  down  through  7[gl- 
Roger,  still  sound  good. 

OK,  the  altimeter  is  active  at  65  [thousand  feet].    There's  60  [thou- 
sand feet]. 
Roger,  65,000. 

OK,  I'm  getting  some  contrails,  evidently  shock  wave,  50,000  feet; 

I'm  feeling  good.    I'm  very  good,  everything  is  fine. 
Roger,  50,000. 


43 


Trans- 


mission 

Communi-  dura- 


cation 

i'.oiuniiini  - 

Time, 

tion, 

•umlter 

cator 

min:  sec 

see 

56 

Hell  7 

8:52 

1.  5 

Cap  Com 

8:54 

2.5 

57 

Hell  i 

9:00.5 

3 

58 

Bell  7 

9:07 

2 

59 

Bell  7 

9:19 

7 

Cap  Coin 

9:24 

2.  5 

« 

60 

Bell  7 

9:28 

2 

61 

Bell  7 

9:36.5 

2.5 

62 

Bell  7 

9:41.5 

4.  5 

Cap  Com 

9:45 

4 

63 

Bell  7 

9:49.5 

13.  5 

Cap  Com 

64 

Bell  7 

10:05.5 

2 

Cap  Com 

65 

Bell  7 

10:11 

25 

(') 

66 

Bell  7 

10:40.5 

3 

Cap  Com 

ATS 

67 

Bell  7 

Card  File  23 

68 

Bell  7 

10:52 

4 

ATS 

69 

Bell  7 

11:12 

8 

ATS 

70 

Bell  7 

11:28 

4 

ATS 

71 

Bell  7 

11:42.5 

2.  5 

ATS 

72 

Bell  7 

11:47.5 

3 

73 

Bell  7 

12:04 

5 

74 

Bell  7 

12:15 

1.  5 

75 

Bell  7 

12:35 

16 

ATS 

76 

Bell  7 

13:04 

2 

Card  File  23 

Communicator  unident  ified. 


Communieation 

45,000,  do  you  still  read? 

Affirmative.    Still  reading  you.    You  sound  good. 
OK,  40,000  feet,  do  you  read? 
35,000  feet,  if  you  read  me, 

30,000  feet,  everything  is  good,  everything  is  good. 

Bell  7,  this  is  Cap  Com.    Hon  ....    [Rest  of  communieation  not 

received.] 
Cape,  do  you  read? 
25,000  feet. 

Approaching  drogue  chute  attitude. 

There's  the  drogue  chute.    The  periscope  has  extended. 

This  is  .  .  .  we  have  a  green  drogue  [light]  here,  7  how  do  vou  read? 

OK,  we're  coming  down  to  15,000  feet,  if  anyone  reads.    W  e  re  on 

emergency  flow  rate,  can  see  out  the  periscope  OK.    The  drogue 

chute  is  good. 

Roger,  understand  drogue  is  good,  the  periscope  is  out. 

There's  13,000  feet. 

Roger. 

There  goes  the  main  chute:  it's  reefed;  main  chute  is  good;  main  chute 
is  good;  rate  of  descent  coming  down,  coming  down  to — there's  40 
feet  per  second,  30  feel  per,  32  feet  per  second  on  the  main  chute, 
and  the  landing  hag  is  out  green. 

Ah,  it's  better  than  it  was,  Chuck. 

Hello,  does  anybody  read  Liberty  Bell,  main  chute  is  good,  landing 

bag  [light]  is  on  green. 
And  the  landing  bag  [light]  is  on  green. 

Liberty  Bell  7,  Liberty  Bell  7,  this  is  Atlantic  Ship  Cap  Com.  Read 
you  loud  and  clear.    Our  telemetry  confirms  your  events.  Over. 

Ah,  roger,  is  anyone  reading  Libertv  Bell  7?  Over. 

Roger,  Liberty  Bell  7,  reading  you  loud  and  clear.    This  is  C 
23.  Over. 

Atlantic  Ship  Cap  Com,  this  is  Liberty  Bell  7,  how  do  you  nan  „ie? 
Over. 

Read  you  loud  and  clear,  loud  and  clear.    Over.    Libertv  I5el!  7, 
Liberty  Bell  7,  this  is  Atlantic  Ship  Cap  Com.    How  do  you  read  me? 
Over. 

Atlantic  Ship  Cap  Com,  this  is  Liberty  Bell  7,  I  read  you  loud  and 

clear.    How,  me?  Over. 
Roger,  Bell  7,  read  you  loud  and  clear,  your  status  looks  good,  your 

systems  look  good,  we  confirm  your  events.  Over. 
Ah,  roger,  and  confirm  the  fuel  has  dumped.  Over. 
Roger,  confirm  again,  confirm  again,  has  your  auto  fuel  dumped? 

Over. 

Auto  fuel  and  manual  fuel  has  dumped. 
Roger,  roger. 

And  I'm  in  the  process  of  putting  the  pins  back  in  the  door  at  this  time. 
OK,  I'm  passing  down  through  6,000  feet,  everything  is  good,  ah. 
I'm  going  to  open  my  face  plate. 

Hello,  I  can't  get  one;  1  can't  get  one  door  pin  back  in.  I've  tried 
and  tried  and  I  can't  get  it  back  in.  And  I'm  coming,  ATS,  I'm 
passing  through  5,000  feet  and  I  don't  think  I  have  one  of  the  door 
pins  in 

Roger,  Bell  7,  roger. 

Do  you  have  any  word  from  the  recovery  troops? 

Liberty  Bell  7,  this  is  Card  File  23;  we  are  heading  directly  toward 
you. 


44 


Trans- 


11- 

Communi- 

t  c.ator 

Time, 
mi  n:  sec 

mission 

tion, 
sec 

Bell  7 

13:18 

4 

ATS 

Bell  7 

13:33 

13 

ATS 
Bell  7 

13:49 

45 

80 


81 


82 


83 


84 

5 


16 


ATS 
Bell  7 
ATS 

(') 

Bell  7 

0) 

Hell  7 

(l) 

Bell  7 


Bell  7 

ATS 

Bell  7 

Hunt  Club  1 
Card  File  9 

Hell  7 


(') 

(') 

Hunt  Club  1 
Iiell  7 

Hunt  Club  1 
Bell  7 
Bel!  7 

Hunt  Club  1 
Bell  7 


14:39 


14:54 


16:35 


18:07 

18:16 
18:23 


18:32.5 


33 


8.  5 


Hunt  Club  1 
Communicator  unidentified. 


Communication 

ATS,  this  is  Cap — this  is  Liberty  Bell  7.    Do  you  have  any  word 

from  the  recovery  troops? 
Negative,  Bell  7,  negative.    Do  you  have  any  transmission  to  MCC 

[Mercury  Control  Center  ?  Over. 
Ah,  roger,  you  might  make  a  note  that  there  is  one  small  hole  in  ray 

chute.    It  looks  like  it's  about  6  inches  by  6  inches — it's  a  sort  of 

a — actually  it's  a  triangular  rip,  I  guess. 
Ah,  roger,  roger. 

I'm  passing  through  3,000  feet,  and  all  the  fuses  are  in  flight  condi- 
tions; ASCS  is  normal,  auto:  we're  on  rate  command;  gyros  are 
normal;  auto  retrojetlison  is  armed;  squibs  are  armed  also.  Four 
fuel  handles  are  in;  decompress  and  reeompress  are  in;  retro  delay  is 
normal;  retroheat  is  off,  cabin  lights  are  both,  T\I  [telemeter]  is  on. 
Rescue  aids  is  auto;  landing  bag  is  auto;  retract  scope  is  auto; 
retroattitude  is  auto.  All  ihe  three,  five  pull  rings  are  in.  Going 
down  through  some  clouds  to  2,000  feet.  ATS,  I'm  at  2,000  feet; 
everything  is  normal. 

Roger,  Bell  7,  what  is  your  rate  of  descent  again?  Over. 

The  rate  of  descent  is  varying  between  28  and  30  feet  per  second. 

Ah,  roger,  roger,  and  once  again  verify  your  fuel  has  dumped.  Over. 

Seven  ahead  at  bearing  020.  Over. 

OK.     My  max  g  was  about  10.2;  altimeter  is  1,000  [feet];  cabin 

pressure  is  coming  toward  15  [pai], 
^  e'll  make  up. 
Temperature  is  90  [°F]. 
We'll  make  up  an  eye  rep. 

Coolant  quantity  is  30  [percent];  temperature  is  68  [°F]:  pressure  is 
14  [psi[;  main  02  is  60  [percent];  norma]  is,  main  is  60  [percent]; 
emergency  is  100  [percent]:  suit  fan  is  normal;  cabin  fan  is  normal. 
We  have  21  amps,  and  I'm  getting  ready  for  impact  here. 

Can  see  the  water  coming  right  on  up. 

Liberty  Bell  7,  Liberty  Bell  7,  this  is  Atlantic  Cap  Com,  do  you  read 

me?  Over. 
OK,  does  anyone  read  Liberty  Bell  7?  Over. 
Liberty  Bell  7,  Hunt  Club  1  is  now  2  miles  southwest  you. 
Liberty  Bell  7  this  9  Card  File.    We  have  your  entry  into  the  water. 

Will  be  over  you  in  just  about  30  seconds. 
Roger,  my  condition  is  good;  OK  the  capsule  is  floating,  slowly  coming 

vertical,  have  actuated  the  rescue  aids.    The  reserve  chute  has 

jettisoned,  in  fact  I  can  sec  it  in  the  water,  and  the  whip  antenna 

should  be  up. 
Hunt  Club,  did  you  copy? 

OK,  Hunt  Club,  this  is  .  .  .    Don't  forget  the  antenna. 
This  is  Hunt  Club,  say  again. 

Hunt  Club,  this  is  Liberty  Bell  7.    My  antenna  should  be  up. 
This  is  Hunt  Club  1  .  .  .  your  antenna  is  erected. 
Ah,  roger. 

OK,  give  me  how  much  longer  it'll  be  before  you  gel  here. 
This  is  Hunt  Club  1,  we  are  in  orbit  now  at  this  time,  around  the 
capsule. 

Roger,  give  me  about  another  5  minutes  here,  to  mark  these  switch 
positions  here,  before  I  give  you  a  call  to  come  in  and  hook  on. 
Are  you  ready  to  come  in  and  hook  on  anytime? 

Hunt  Club  1,  roger  we  are  ready  anytime  you  are. 


Cum  mil  ni- 
cation 
numher 


87 


8K 


a*) 


1)0 


<)1 


92 

ti:s 


04 


Commuiii-  Time, 

catur  ntin:sec 

Bell  7  18:  H 

Hunt  Club  1 
Card  Kilt-  9 


Hunt  Club  1 

Bell  7  20:1:"> 

Hunt  Club  1 


Hell  7 


Hunt  Club  1 
Cap  Com 
( lap  Com 
Card  File  9 
Hunt  Club  1 
Card  File  9 


Hunt  Club  1 

Hunt  Club  3 
Card  File  9 
liell  7 

Hum  Club  1 

Hell  7 

Hum  Club  1 
liell  7 

Hunt  Club  1 
Bell  7 

Hum  Club  I 
Hell  7 


.20:  26 


24:03 


2.",:  19.,", 
25:30 

25:12 
25:52.5 

26:09 


mission 
dura- 
tion , 
sec 


1.  5 


Communication 

OK,  give  me  about  another  3  or  4  minutes  here  to  take  these  switch 

positions,  then  J  11  be  ready  for  you. 
1,  wilco. 

Hey  Hunt  Clubs,  Card  File,  Card  File  9,  I'll  stand  by  to  escort  sou 
back  as  soon  as  you  lift  out.  1  keep  other  aircraft  at  at  least  2.000 
feet. 

Ah,  liell  7  this  is  Hunt  Club  1. 
Go,  go  ahead  Hunt  Club  f . 

Roger,  this  is  I,  observe  something,  possibly  the  canister  in  the  water 

along  side  capsule.     Will  we  be  interfering  with  any  I'M  |telerrielr_v  j 

if  we  come  down  and  lake  a  look  at  it/ 
Negative,  not  at  all,  Fill  just  going  to  put  the  rest  of  thi>  stuff  on  tape 

and  then  I'll  be  ready  for  vou,  in  just  about  2  more  minutes,  I  would 

say. 
1  roger. 

Liberty  Bell  7,  Cap  Com  at  the  Cape  on  a  test  eouril.  Over. 
Liberty  bell  7,  Cape  Cap  Com  on  a  test  count.  Over. 
Any  Hunt  Club,  this  is  9  Card  bile. 
Station  calling  Hunt  Club,  say  again. 

This  is  Niner  Cardfile,  there's  an  object  on  a  line  in  the  water,  ah.  jus! 
about  160  degrees.  The  N  ASA  people  suspect  it's  the  dye  marker 
that  didn't  activate:  ah,  say  it's  about,  ah,  /4  of  a  mile  out  from  the 
capsule.     Ah,  after  the  lift  out,  will  you  take  a  check  on  il?  Over. 

Ah,  this  is  Hunt  Club  1,  roger.  will  have  Hunt  Club  3  check  ul  ibis 
time,  you  copy  3. 

Hunt  Club  f,  believe  he  said  'U  of  a  mile? 

This  is  9  Card,  that  is  affirmative. 


This  is  Liberty  Hell 


Are  vou  ready  lor  the 


power  down  and  h. 
all  when  we're  readv 


OK,  Hunt  Club, 
pickup? 

This  is  Hunt  Club  1:  this  is  allirmative. 
OK,  latch  on,  then  give  me  a  call  and  1 
hatch,  OK? 

This  is  Hunt  Club  L,  roger,  will  give  vou  a  call  when  we're  ready  l< 
you  to  blow. 

Roger,  I've  uti[  lugged  my  suit  so  I'm  kinda  warm  now  so. 
1 ,  roger. 

Now  if  vou  tell  me  to.  ah,  you're  ready  lor  me  to  blow,  I  II  have  to 
take  my  helmet  off,  power  down,  and  then  blow  the  hatch. 

1,  roger,  and  when  vou  blow  the  hatch,  the  collar  will  already  be  down 
there  waiting  for  vou,  and  we're  turning  base  at  this  lime. 

Ah,  roger. 


No  further  communications  were  received  as  a  result  of  the  emergency  egress  required  by  the  failure 
of  the  side  hatch. 

Reference 

1.  .Slaytos,  Donald  K.:  Pilot  Training  and  Pre  flight  Preparation,   Proc.  Conf.  on  Results  of  the  First  U.S.  Manned 
Suborbital  Space  Flight,  NASA,  Nat.  Inst.  Health,  and  Nat.  Acad.  Sri.,  June  6.  1961,  pp.  53-60. 


46 


7.  PILOT'S  FLIGHT  REPORT 

Bv  Virgil  I.  Gkissom.  Astronaut,  NASA  Manned  Spacecraft  Center 


Introduction 

The  second  Mercury  manned  flight  was  made  on 
J ul\  21.  l'Jol.  The  flight  plan  provided  a  ballistic 
Irajertorv  having  a  maximum  altitude  of  103  nauti- 
cal mile?;,  a  range  of  263  nautical  miles,  and  a  5- 
minute  period  of  weightlessness. 

The  following  is  a  chronological  report  on  the 
pilot's  activities  prior  to.  during,  and  after  the  flight. 

Prenijrht 

The  preflight  period  is  composed  of  two  distinct 
areas.  The  first  is  the  training  that  has  been  in 
progress  for  the  past  21  j  years  and  which  is  still  in 
progress.    The  second  area,  and  the  one  that  as- 


sumes the  most  importance  as  launch  date  ap- 
proaches, is  the  participation  in  the  day-to-day 
engineering  and  testing  that  applies  directly  to  the 
spacecraft  that  is  to  be  flown. 

Over  the  past  2  years,  a  great  deal  of  information 
has  been  published  about  the  astronaut  training  pro- 
gram and  the  program  has  been  previously  described 
in  reference  1.  In  the  present  paper.  I  intend  to 
comment  on  onlv  three  trainers  which  1  feel  have 
been  of  the  greatest  value  in  preparing  me  for  this 
flight. 

The  first  trainer  that  has  proven  most  valuable  is 
the  Mercurv  procedures  trainer  w  hich  is  a  fixed- 
based  computer-operated  flight  simulator.  There 
are  two  of  these  trainers   i  fig.   7-1).  one  at  the 


Figuke  7-1.  Procedures  trainf-r. 


47 


NASA-Langley  Air  Force  Base,  Va.,  and  one  at 
the  Mercury  Control  Certer.  Cape  Canaveral,  Fla. 
These  procedures  traineis  have  been  used  contin- 
uously throughout  the  program  to  learn  the  system 
operations,  to  learn  emergency  operating  techniques 
during  system  malfunctions,  to  learn  control  tech- 
niques, and  to  develop  cperational  procedures  be- 
tween pilot  and  ground  personnel. 

During  the  period  preceding  the  launch,  the 
trainers  were  used  to  finalize  the  flight  plan  and  to 
gain  a  high  degree  of  proficiency  in  flying  the  mis- 
sion profile  (fig.  7-2).  First,  the  systems  to  be 
checked  specifically  bv  the  pilot  were  determined. 
These  were  to  be  the  manual  proportional  control 
system;  the  rate  command  control  system;  attitude 
control  with  instruments  as  a  reference:  attitude 
control  with  the  earth-sky  horizon  as  a  reference; 
the  UHF,  HF,  and  emergency  voice  communications 
systems;  and  the  manual  retrofire  override.  The 
procedures  trainer  was  then  used  to  establish  an 
orderly  sequence  of  acconplishing  these  tasks.  The 
pilot  functions  were  tried  and  modified  a  great  num- 
ber of  times  before  a  satisfactory  sequence  was 
determined.  After  the  flight  plan  was  established, 
it  was  practiced  until  each  phase  and  time  was 
memorized.  During  this  phase  of  training,  there 
was  a  tendency  to  add  more  tasks  to  the  mission 
flight  plan  as  proficiency  was  gained.  Even  though 
the  MR-4  flight  plan  (table  7-1)  contained  less  pilot 
functions  than  the  MR— 3  flight  plan,  I  found  that 
the  view  out  the  window,  which  cannot  be  simulated, 
distracted  me  from  the  less  important  tasks  and 
often  caused  me  to  fall  bebind  the  planned  program. 


The  only  time  this  distraction  concerned  me  was 
prior  to  retrofire;  at  other  times,  I  felt  that  1  g 
out  the  window  was  of  greater  importance  the 
of  the  planned  menial  tasks.  In  spite  of  this  pleooant 
distraction,  all  tasks  were  accomplished  with  the 
exception  of  visual  control  of  retrofire. 

The  second  trainer  that  was  of  great  value  and  one 
that  I  wish  had  been  more  readily  available  prior  to 
launch  was  the  air-lubricated  free-attitude  (ALFA) 
trainer  at  the  NASA-Langley  Air  Force  Base.  Va. 
(fig.  7-3).  This  trainer  provided  the  only  training 
in  visual  control  of  the  spacecraft.  I  had  intended 
to  use  the  earth-sky  horizon  as  my  primary  means 
of  attitude  control  and  had  spent  a  number  of  hours 
on  the  ALFA  trainer  practicing  retrofire  using  the 
horizon  as  a  reference.  Because  of  the  rush  of 
events  at  Cape  Canaveral  during  the  2  weeks  prior 
to  launch,  I  was  unable  to  use  this  trainer.  I  felt 
this  probably  had  some  bearing  on  my  instinctive 
switch  to  instruments  for  retrofire  during  the  flight, 
instead  of  using  the  horizon  as  a  reference. 

The  third  training  device  that  was  of  great  value 
was  the  Johnsville  human  centrifuge.  With  this  de- 
vice, we  learned  to  control  the  spacecraft  during  the 
accelerations  imposed  by  launch  and  reentry  and 
learned  muscle  control  to  aid  blood  circulation  and 
respiration  in  the  acceleration  environment.  The 
acceleration  buildup  during  the  flight  was  con?'  —  r- 
ably  smoother  than  that  experienced  on  the 
fuge  and  probably  for  this  reason  and  for  ot.  .4 
psychological  reasons,  the  g-forces  were  much  easier 
to  withstand  during  the  flight  than  during  the  train- 
ing missions. 


REFEEENCE  -  W!N:3EC 


ALT.  APFRCX.  ICii.SN.M. 


AT  34:46  RET3C~IRE  SEQUENCE  IS  INITIATED 


NOR^LAL  CREITING  ATTH  UDE 


ATi  itud-  p?,cc-f.av2*:;kg 

BY  \SCSt  COUNTER  CLOCK. 
'.VIS  ■  YAW  MANEUVER 


L  MINUTE  AFTER  ESTRONE  STARTS 
RETRC PACKAGE  JETTISONED 


c'JSKC  AFTER  RETRO  PACKAGE 

:ETTI3C-\, PERISCOPE  13  RETRACTED 


20  ,±7"  ANGLE- CF- ATTACK. 
AFTER  .  2iqt  STEADY  RCLL  CF 
:C'a  TO  12    PER  SECOND 


is  sec  popiod  of  rate  damping 


V_  C2:3L  SPACECRAFT  SEPARATION 
A-ND  P  iP.ISOGPl  EXTENDED 


32:25  CUTCFE,  TO' VSR  SEPARATION 


PERIOD  CF  WEIGHTLESSNESS  APPPOJi.  :  Mitt. 
TOTAL  FLIGHT  TIME  APPRCX.  1=  MIN. 


CPS?.'  PARACHUTES 


CO  12=  -5C 

RANGE,  NAUTICAL  WILES 


MAX  TANGENTIAL 
LOAD  FACTOR  llq 
06:20 

EXTEND  PERISCOPE  AGAIN 


Figure  7-2.  Mission  profile. 


48 


Figure  7-3.  ALFA  trainer. 


One  other  phenomenon  that  was  experienced  on 
the  centrifuge  proved  to  be  of  great  value  during 
the  flight.  Quite  often,  as  the  centrifuge  changed 
rapidly  from  a  high  g-level  to  a  low  or  1  g  level, 
a  false  tumbling  sensation  was  encountered.  This 
became  a  common  and  expected  sensation  and  when 
the  same  thing  occurred  at  launch  vehicle  cutoff,  it 
was  in  no  way  disturbing,  A  quick  glance  at  my 
instruments  convinced  me  that  I.  indeed,  was  not 
tumbling. 

The  pilot's  confidence  comes  from  all  of  the  fore- 
going training  methods  and  from  many  other  areas, 
but  the  real  confidence  comes  from  participation  in 
the  day-to-day  engineering  decisions  and  testing  that 
occur  during  the  prefligh:  checkout  at  Cape  Canav- 
eral. It  was  during  thh  time  that  I  learned  the 
particular  idiosyncrasies  of  the  spacecraft  that  I 
was  to  fly.  A  great  deal  of  time  had  already  been 
spent  in  learning  both  normal  and  emergency  sys- 
tem operations.  But  during  the  testing  at  the  pre- 
flight  complex  and  at  the  launching  pad,  I  learned 
all  the  differences  between  this  spacecraft  and  the 
simulator  that  had  been  u:;ed  for  training.  I  learned 
the  various  noises  and  vibrations  that  are  connected 
with  the  operation  of  the  systems.  This  was  the 
time  that  I  really  begar  to  feel  at  home  in  this 
cockpit.  This  training  was  very  beneficial  on  launch 
day  because  I  felt  that  I  knew  this  spacecraft  and 
what  it  would  do.  and  h.rving  spent  so  much  time 
in  the  cockpit  I  felt  it  was  normal  to  be  there. 

As  a  group,  we  astrcnauts  feel  that  after  the 
spacecraft  arrives  at  the  Cape,  our  time  is  best  spent 
in  participating  in  spacecraft  activities.  This  causes 
some  conflict  in  training,  since  predicting  the  time 
test  runs  of  the  preflight  checkouts  will  start  or  end 
is  a  mystic  art  that  is  mderstood  by  few  and  is 
unreliable  at  its  best.  Qtite  frequently  this  causes 
training  sessions  to  be  canceled  or  delayed,  but  it 
should  he  of  no  great  concern  since  most  of  the 
training  has  been  accomplished  prior  to  this  time. 
The  use  of  the  trainers  luring  this  period  is  pri- 
marily to  keep  performance  at  a  peak  and  the  time 
required  will  vary  from  pilot  to  pilot. 

At  the  time  the  spacecraft  is  moved  from  the  pre- 
flight complex  to  the  launching  pad.  practically  all 
training  stops.  From  this,  time  on,  I  was  at  the  pad 
full  time  participating  in  or  observing  every  test 
that  was  made  on  the  spacecraft — launch-vehicle 
combination.  Here,  I  became  familiar  with  the 
launch  procedure  and  grew  to  know  and  respect  the 


launch  crew.  I  gained  confidence  in  their  profes- 
sional approach  to  and  execution  of  the  pre1  -h 
tests. 

The  Flight 

On  the  day  of  the  flight,  I  followed  the  following 
schedule : 

Event  a.m.  e.s.t. 


Awakened  |  1:10 

Breakfast   1:25 

Physical  examination   1:55 

Sensors  attached  ;  2:25 

Suited  up  j  2:35 

Suit  pressure  check  I  3:05 

Entered  transfer  van  !  3:30  i 

Arrived  at  pad  ,  3:55  , 

Manned  the  spacecraft  |  3:58 

Launched  '  7:20  t 


As  can  be  seen,  6  hours  and  10  minutes  elapsed 
from  the  time  I  was  awakened  until  launch.  This 
time  is  approximately  evenly  divided  between  activi- 
ties prior  to  my  reaching  the  pad  and  time  I  spent 
at  the  pad.  In  this  case,  we  were  planning  on  a 
launch  at  6:00  a.m.  e.s.t.,  but  it  will  probably  always 
be  normal  to  expect  some  holds  that  cannot  be  -!  e- 
dicted.  While  this  time  element  appears  to 
cessive.  we  can  find  no  way  to  reduce  it  belo,  j, 
minimum  at  the  present.  Efforts  are  still  continu- 
ing to  reduce  the  precountdow  n  time  so  that  the  pilot 
will  not  have  had  an  almost  full  working  day  prior 
to  lift-off. 

After  insertion  in  the  spacecraft,  the  launch 
countdown  proceeded  smoothly  and  on  schedule 
until  T  — 45  minutes  when  a  hold  w  as  called  to  install 
a  misalined  bolt  in  the  egress  hatch. 

After  a  hold  of  30  minutes,  the  countdown  was 
resumed  and  proceeded  to  T  — .10  minutes  when  a 
brief  hold  was  called  to  turn  off  the  pad  searchlights. 
By  this  time,  it  was  daylight:  and  the  lights,  which 
cause  interference  with  launch-vehicle  telemetry, 
w  ere  no  longer  needed. 

One  more  hold  was  called  at  T— 15  minutes  to 
await  better  cloud  conditions  because  the  long  focal 
length  cameras  would  not  have  been  able  to  obtain 
proper  coverage  through  the  existing  overcast. 

After  holding  for  41  minutes,  the  count  was  re- 
sumed and  proceeded  smoothly  to  lift-off  at  7 :20 
a.m.,  e.s.t. 


50 


The  communications  and  flow  of  information 
pr;--  to  lift-off  were  very  good.    After  participating 
prelaunch  test  and  the  cancellation  2  days 
p.       uslv.  I  was  very  familiar  with  the  countdown 
and  knew  exactly  what  was  going  on  at  all  times. 

As  the  Blockhouse  Capsule  Communicator  (Cap 
Com  I  called  ignition,  I  felt  the  launch  vehicle  start 
to  vihrate  and  could  hear  the  engines  start.  Just 
seconds  after  this,  the  elapsed-time  clock  started  and 
the  Mercury  Control  Center  Cap  Com  confirmed 
lift-off.  At  that  time,  1  punched  the  Time  Zero 
Override,  started  the  stopwatch  function  on  the 
spacecraft  clock,  and  reported  that  the  elapsed-time 
clock  had  started. 

The  powered  flight  portion  of  the  mission  was 
in  general  very  smooth.  A  low-order  vibration 
started  at  approximately  T  +  50  seconds,  but  it  did 
not  develop  above  a  low  level  and  w-as  undetectable 
after  about  T  +  70  seconds.  This  vibration  was  in 
no  wav  disturbing  and  it  did  not  cause  interference 
in  either  communications  or  vision.  The  magnitude 
of  the  accelerations  corresponds  well  to  the  launch 
simulations  on  the  centrifuge,  but  the  onset  was 
much  smoother. 

Communications  throughout  the  powered  flight 
were  satisfactory.  The  VOX  (  voice  operated  relay) 
was  used  for  pilot  transmissions  instead  of  the  push- 
\  button.  The  noise  level  was  never  high 
a  at  any  time  to  key  the  transmitter.  Each 
standard  report  was  made  on  time  and  there  was 
never  any  requirement  for  myself  or  the  Cap  Com 
to  repeat  any  transmission. 

Vision  out  the  w  indow  w  as  good  at  all  times  during 
launch.  As  viewed  from  the  pad.  the  sky  was  its 
normal  light  blue:  but  as  the  altitude  increased,  the 
sky  became  a  darker  and  darker  blue  until  approxi- 
mately 2  minutes  after  lift-off,  which  corresponds 
to  an  altitude  of  approximately  100.000  feet,  the 
sky  rapidlv  changed  to  an  absolute  black.  At  this 
time.  I  saw  what  appeared  to  be  one  rather  faint 
star  in  the  center  of  the  w  indow  I  fig.  7-4  ).  ft  was 
about  equal  in  brightness  to  Polaris.  Later,  it  was 
determined  that  this  was  the  planet  Venus  whose 
brightness  is  equal  to  a  star  of  magnitude  of  —3. 

Launch-vehicle  engine  cutoff  was  sudden  and  I 
could  not  sense  any  tail-off  of  the  launch  vehicle. 
1  did  feel,  as  I  described  earlier,  a  very  brief  tum- 
bling sensation.  The  firing  of  the  escape-tower 
clamp  ring  and  escape  rocket  is  quite  audible  and  I 
could  see  the  escape  rocket  motor  and  tower  through- 


out its  tail-off  burning  phase  and  for  what  seemed  like 
quite  some  time  after  that  climbing  off  to  my  right. 
Actually.  I  think  1  was  still  watching  the  tower  at 
the  time  the  posigrade  rockets  fired,  which  occured 
10  seconds  after  cutoff.  The  tower  was  still  defin- 
able as  a  long,  slender  object  against  the  black  sky 
at  this  time. 


*  First-order  s:ar 

*  Secor.d-crdsr  star 

*  Triird-order  ^t.ar 


Figure  7-4.  Approximate  view  of  stars  through  centerline 
window. 

The  posigrade  firing  is  a  very  audible  bang  and 
a  definite  kick,  producing  a  deceleration  of  approxi- 
mately lg.  Prior  to  this  time,  the  spacecraft  was 
quite  stable  with  no  apparent  motion,  As  the  posi- 
grade rockets  separated  the  spacecraft  from  the 
launch  vehicle,  the  spacecraft  angular  motions  and 
angular  accelerations  were  quite  apparent.  Space- 
craft damping  v  hich  was  to  begin  immediately  after 
separation  was  apparently  satisfactory,  although 
I  cannot  really  report  on  the  magnitude  of  any  an- 
gular rates  caused  by  posigrade  firing. 

The  spacecraft  turnaround  to  retrofire  attitude  is 
quite  a  weird  maneuver  to  ride  through.  At  first.  I 
thought  the  spacecraft  might  be  tumbling  out  of  con- 
trol. A  quick  check  of  the  instruments  indicated  that 
turnaround  was  proceeding  much  as  those  experi- 
enced on  the  procedures  trainer,  with  the  expection 
of  roll  attitude  which  appeared  to  be  very  slow  and 
behind  the  schedule  that  I  was  expecting. 

As  the  turnaround  started,  I  could  see  a  bright 
shaft  of  light,  similar  to  the  sun  shining  into  a 
blackened  room,  start  to  move  from  my  lower  left  up 
across  my  torso.  Even  though  I  knew  the  window 
reduces  light  transmissions  equivalent  to  the  earth  s 
atmosphere,  I  was  concerned  that  it  might  shine 
directly  into  my  eyes  and  blind  me.  The  light  moved 
across  my  torso  and  disappeared  completely. 


51 


A  quick  look  through  the  periscope  after  it  ex- 
tended did  not  provide  m;  with  any  useful  informa- 
tion. I  was  unable  to  see  land,  only  clouds  and  the 
ocean. 

The  view  through  the  v.indow  became  quite  spec- 
tacular as  the  horizon  came  into  view.  The  sight 
was  truly  breathtaking.  The  earth  was  very  bright, 
the  sky  was  black,  and  the  curvature  of  the  earth  was 
quite  prominent.  Between  the  earth  and  sky.  there 
was  a  border  which  startad  at  the  earth  as  a  light 
blue  and  became  increasingly  darker  with  altitude. 
There  was  a  transition  reg  ion  betw  een  the  dark  blue 
and  the  black  sky  that  is  best  described  as  a  fuzzy 
gray  area.  This  is  a  very  narrow  band,  but  there  is 
no  sharp  transition  from  blue  to  black.  The  whole 
border  appeared  to  be  uniform  in  height  over  the 
approximately  1,000  miles  of  horizon  that  was  visible 
to  me. 

The  earth  itself  was  very  bright.  The  only  land- 
mark I  was  able  to  identi  fy  during  the  first  portion 
of  the  weightlessness  period  was  the  Gulf  of  Mexico 
coastline  between  Apalachicola,  Fla.,  and  Mobile, 
Ala.  (fig.  7-5).  The  cloud  coverage  was  quite  ex- 
tensive and  the  curvature  of  this  portion  of  the  coast 
was  very  difficult  to  distinguish.  The  water  and  land 
masses  were  both  a  hazy  blue,  with  the  land  being 


Ficire  7-5.  Approximate  viev  of  earth  through  centerline 
window. 


somewhat  darker.  There  was  a  frontal  system  south 
of  this  area  that  was  clearly  defined. 

One  other  section  of  the  Florida  coast  ca  "> 
view  during  the  left  yaw  maneuver,  but  it  a 
small  section  of  beach  with  no  identifiable  landmarks. 

The  spacecraft  automatic  stabilization  and  control 
system  (ASCSl  had  made  the  turnaround  maneuver 
from  the  position  on  the  launch  vehicle  to  retrofire 
attitude.  The  pitch  and  yaw  axes  stabilized  with 
only  a  moderate  amount  of  overshoot  as  predicted, 
but  the  roll  attitude  was  still  being  programed  and 
was  off  by  approximately  15°  when  I  switched  from 
the  autopilot  to  the  manual  proportional  control  sys- 
tem. The  switchover  occurred  10  seconds  later 
than  planned  to  give  the  ASCS  more  time  to  stabilize 
the  spacecraft.  At  this  point,  I  realized  I  would 
have  to  hurry  my  programed  pitch,  yaw,  and  roll 
maneuvers.  I  tried  to  hurry  the  pitch-up  maneuver ; 
I  controlled  the  roll  attitude  back  within  limits,  but 
the  view  out  the  window  had  distracted  me,  resulting 
in  an  overshoot  in  pitch.  This  put  me  behind  in 
my  schedule  even  more.  I  hit  the  planned  yaw  rate 
but  overshot  in  yaw  attitude  again.  1  realized  that 
my  time  for  control  maneuvers  was  up  and  I  decided 
at  this  point  to  skip  the  planned  roll  maneuver,  since 
the  roll  axis  had  been  exercised  during  the  two  pre- 
vious maneuvers,  and  go  immediately  to  the  next 
task. 

This  was  the  part  of  the  flight  to  which  I  har 
looking  forward.  There  was  a  full  minute  th, 
programed  for  observing  the  earth.  My  observa- 
tions during  this  period  have  already  been  reported 
in  this  paper,  but  the  control  task  was  quite  easy 
when  only  the  horizon  was  used  as  a  reference.  The 
task  was  somewhat  complicated  during  this  phase, 
as  a  result  of  lack  of  yaw  reference.  This  lack  was 
not  a  problem  after  retrofire  when  Cape  Canaveral 
came  into  view.  I  do  not  believe  yaw  attitude  will 
be  a  problem  in  orbital  flight  because  there  should 
be  ample  time  to  pick  adequate  checkpoints;  even 
breaks  in  cloud  formations  would  be  sufficient. 

The  retrosequence  started  automatically  and  at 
the  time  it  started,  I  was  slightly  behind  schedule. 
At  this  point,  I  was  working  quite  hard  to  get  into  a 
good  retrofire  attitude  so  that  I  could  fire  the  retro- 
rockets  manually.  I  received  the  countdown  to  fire 
from  Mercury  Control  Center  Cap  Com  and  fired 
the  retrorockets  manually.  The  retrorockets,  like 
the  escape  rocket  and  posigrades,  could  be  heard 
quite  clearly.  The  thrust  buildup  was  rapid  and 
smooth.  As  the  first  retrorocket  fired,  I  was  look- 
ing out  the  window  and  could  see  that  a  definite 


52 


yaw  to  the  right  was  starting.  I  had  planned  to  con- 
tr  '  i  spacecraft  attitude  during  retrofire  by  using 
!  izon  as  a  reference;  but  as  soon  as  the  right 

ya..  carted.  I  switched  my  reference  to  the  flight  in- 
struments. I  had  been  using  instruments  during  my 
retrofire  practice  for  the  2  weeks  prior  to  the  launch 
in  the  Cape  Canaveral  procedures  trainer  since  the 
activity  at  the  Cape  prevented  the  use  of  the  ALFA 
trainer  located  at  the  iV ASA-Langley  Air  Force 
Base,  Va.  This  probably  explains  the  instinctive 
switch  to  the  flight  instruments. 

The  retrofire  difficulty  was  about  equal  to  the 
more  severe  cases  that  have  been  presented  on  the 
procedures  trainer. 

Immediately  after  retrofire.  Cape  Canaveral  came 
into  view,  ft  was  quite  easy  to  identify.  The  Ba- 
nana and  Indian  Rivers  were  easy  to  distinguish  and 
the  white  beach  all  along  the  coast  was  quite  prom- 
inent. The  colors  that  were  the  most  prominent 
were  the  blue  of  the  ocean,  the  brownish-green  of 
the  interior,  and  the  white  in  between,  which  was 
obviously  the  beach  and  surf.  I  could  see  the  build- 
ing area  on  Cape  Canaveral.  I  do  not  recall  being 
able  to  distinguish  individual  buildings,  but  it  yvas 
obvious  that  it  was  an  area  where  buildings  and 
structures  had  been  erected. 

Immediately  after  retrofire,  the  retro]  ettison 
switrh  was  placed  in  the  armed  position,  and  the 
mode  was  switched  to  the  rate  command  con- 
i  stem.  I  made  a  rapid  check  to  ascertain  that 
the  system  yvas  working  in  all  axes  and  then  1 
switched  from  the  LHF  transmitter  to  the  HF  trans- 
mitter. 

This  one  attempt  to  communicate  on  HF  was  un- 
successful. At  approximately  peak  altitude,  the  HF 
transmitter  was  turned  on  and  the  LHF  transmitter 
was  turned  off.  All  three  receivers — LHF.  HF,  and 
emergency  voice — were  on  continuously.  Immedi- 
ately after  I  reported  switching  to  HF,  the  Mercury 
Control  Center  started  transmitting  to  me  on  HF 
only.  I  did  not  receive  any  transmission  during  this 
period.  After  allowing  the  HF  transmitter  approx- 
imately 10  seconds  to  warm  up.  I  transmitted  but 
received  no  acknowledgement  that  I  was  being  re- 
ceived. Actually,  the  Atlantic  Ship  telemetry  vessel 
located  in  the  landing  area  and  the  Grand  Bahama 
Island  did  receive  my  HF  transmissions.  Prior  to 
the  flight,  both  stations  had  been  instructed  not  to 
transmit  on  the  assigned  frequencies  unless  they 
were  called  by  the  pilot.  After  switching  back  to 
the  I  HF  transmitter.  I  received  a  call  on  the  emer- 
gency voice  that  was  loud  and  clear.     UHF  commu- 


nications were  satisfactory  throughout  the  flight.  I 
was  in  continuous  contact  with  some  facility  at  all 
times,  with  the  exception  of  a  brief  period  on  HF. 

Even  though  all  communications  equipment  oper- 
ated properly,  I  felt  that  I  was  hurrying  all  trans- 
missions too  much.  All  of  the  sights,  sounds,  and 
events  were  of  such  importance  that  I  felt  compelled 
to  talk  of  everything  at  once.  It  was  a  difficult 
choice  to  decide  what  yvas  the  most  important  to 
report  at  any  one  time.  I  wanted  as  much  as  pos- 
sible recorded  so  that  I  would  not  have  to  rely  on  my 
memory  so  much  for  later  reporting. 

As  previously  mentioned,  the  control  mode  was 
switched  from  manual  proportional  to  rate  com- 
mand immediately  after  retrofire.  The  procedures 
trainer  simulation  in  this  system  seems  to  be 
slightly  more  difficult  than  the  actual  case.  I  found 
attitudes  were  easy  to  maintain  and  rates  were  no 
problem.  The  rate  command  system  yvas  much 
easier  to  fly  than  the  manual  proportional  system. 
The  reverse  is  normally  true  on  the  trainer.  The 
sluggish  roll  system  was  probably  complicating  the 
control  task  during  the  manual  proportional  control 
phase  of  the  flight,  while  roll  accelerations  appeared 
to  be  normal  on  the  rate  command  system. 

The  rate  command  control  system  was  used  after 
retrofire  and  throughout  the  reentry  phase  of  the 
flight.  At  the  zero  rate  command  position,  the  stick 
was  centered.  This  system  had  a  deadband  of  ±3 
deg  'sec.  Our  experience  on  the  procedures  trainer 
had  indicated  that  this  system  yvas  more  difficult  to 
fly  than  the  manual  proportional  control  system. 
This  was  not  the  case  during  this  flight.  Zero  rates 
and  flight  attitudes  were  easy  to  maintain.  The  rec- 
ords do  indicate  that  an  excessive  amount  of  fuel 
was  expended  during  this  period.  Approximately 
15  percent  of  the  manual  fuel  supply  was  used  dur- 
ing the  2  minutes  the  system  was  operating.  A  major 
portion  of  the  2 -minute  period  was  during  the  re- 
entry when  thrusters  were  operating  almost  con- 
tinuously to  dampen  the  reentrv  oscillations. 

The  0.05g  telelight  illuminated  on  schedule  and 
shortly  thereafter  I  reported  g's  starting  to  build. 
I  checked  the  accelerometer  and  the  g-level  was 
something  less  than  Ig  at  this  time.  The  next  time  I 
reported,  I  was  at  6g  and  I  continued  to  report  and 
function  throughout  the  high-g  portion  of  the  flight. 

The  spacecraft  rates  increased  during  the  reentry, 
indicating  that  the  spacecraft  was  oscillating  in  both 
vaw  and  pitch.  I  made  a  few  control  inputs  at  this 
time,  but  I  could  not  see  any  effects  on  the  rates,  so 
I  decided  just  to  ride  out  the  oscillations.   The  pitch 


53 


rate  needle  was  oscillating  full  scale  at  a  rapid  rate 
of  ±6  deg/sec  during  tiis  time  and  the  vaiv  rate 
began  oscillating  full  sea  e  slightly  later  than  pitch. 
At  no  time  were  these  oscillations  noticeable  inside 
the  spacecraft. 

During  this  phase  of  reentry  and  until  main  para- 
chute deployment,  there  is  a  noticeable  roar  and  a 
mild  buffeting  of  the  spacecraft.  This  is  probably 
the  noise  of  a  blunt  obje:t  moving  rapidly  through 
the  atmosphere  and  the  buffeting  is  not  distracting 
nor  does  it  interfere  with  pilot  function. 

The  drogue  parachute  deployment  is  quite  visible 
from  inside  the  spacecraft  and  the  firing  of  drogue 
parachute  mortar  is  clearly  audible.  The  opening 
shock  of  the  drogue  paraciute  is  mild;  there  is  a  mild 
pulsation  or  breathing  of  1  he  drogue  parachute  which 
can  be  felt  inside  the  spacecraft. 

As  the  drogue  parachute  is  released,  the  space- 
craft starts  to  drop  at  a  greater  rate.  The  change 
in  g -field  is  quite  notice  able.  Main  parachute  de- 
ployment is  visible  out  the  window  also.  A  mild 
shock  is  felt  as  the  main  parachute  deploys  in  its 
reefed  condition.  The  ccmplete  parachute  Is  visible 
at  this  time.  As  the  reefing  cutters  fire,  the  para- 
chute deploys  to  its  fully  opened  condition.  Again, 


(al  Normal  stored  position. 

Figure  7-6. 


a  mild  shock  is  felt.  About  80  percent  of  the  para- 
chute is  visible  at  this  time  and  it  is  quite  -  n- 
forting  sight.  The  spacecraft  rotates  and  ? 
slowly  under  the  parachute  at  first:  the  rate  ^re 
mild  and  hardly  noticeable. 

The  spacecraft  landing  in  the  water  was  a  mild 
jolt;  not  hard  enough  to  cause  discomfort  or  dis- 
orientation. The  spacecraft  recovery  section  went 
under  the  water  and  I  had  the  feeling  that  I  was 
on  my  left  side  and  slightly  head  down.  The  w  indow 
was  covered  completely  with  water  and  there  was 
a  disconcerting  gurgling  noise.  A  quick  check 
showed  no  water  entering  the  spacecraft.  The  space- 
craft started  to  slowly  right  itself:  as  soon  as  I  was 
sure  the  recovery  section  was  out  of  the  water,  I 
ejected  the  reserve  parachute  by  actuating  the  re- 
covey  aids  switch.  The  spacecraft  then  righted 
itself  rapidly. 

I  felt  that  I  was  in  good  condition  at  this  point 
and  started  to  prepare  myself  for  egress.  I  had 
previously  opened  the  face  plate  and  had  discon- 
nected the  visor  seal  hose  while  descending  on  the 
main  parachute.  The  next  moves  in  order  were  to 
disconnect  the  oxygen  outlet  hose  at  the  helmet, 
unfasten  the  helmet  from  the  suit,  release  the  chest 


(b)  Unrolled  position. 


Neck  dam. 


54 


strap,  release  the  lap  belt  and  shoulder  harness,  re- 
le?'  Ki  knee  straps,  disconnect  the  biomedical  sen- 
se 1  roll  up  the  neck  dam.  The  neck  dam  is 
a  ru.  .jcr  diaphragm  that  is  fastened  on  the  exterior 
of  the  suit,  below  the  helmet  attaching  ring.  After 
the  helmet  is  disconnected,  the  neck  dam  is  rolled 
around  the  ring  and  up  around  the  neck,  similar 
to  a  turtle-neck  sweater.  I  See  fig.  7-6. )  This  left 
me  connected  to  the  spacecraft  at  two  points,  the 
oxygen  inlet  hose  which  I  reeded  for  cooling  and 
the  helmet  communications  lead. 

At  this  time,  I  turned  my  attention  to  the  door. 
First,  I  released  the  restraining  wires  at  both  ends 
arid  tossed  them  towards  my  feet.  Then  I  removed 
the  knife  from  the  door  and  placed  it  in  the  sur- 
vival pack.  The  next  task  was  to  remove  the  cover 
and  safety  pin  from  the  hatch  detonator.  I  felt  at 
this  time  that  everything  had  gone  nearly  perfectly 
and  that  I  would  go  ahead  and  mark  the  switch 
position  chart  as  had  been  requested. 

After  about  3  or  4  minutes,  I  instructed  the  heli- 
copter to  come  on  in  and  hook  onto  the  spacecraft 
and  confirmed  the  egress  procedures  with  him.  I 
unhooked  my  oxygen  inlet  hose  and  was  lying  on 
the  couch,  waiting  for  the  helicopter's  call  to  blow 
the  hatch.  I  was  lying  flat  on  my  back  at  this  time 
and  I  had  turned  my  attention  to  the  knife  in  the 
sur--;"al  pack,  wondering  if  there  might  be  some  way 
I  carry  it  out  with  me  as  a  souvenir.    I  heard 

tl.  tch  blow — the  noise  was  a  dull  thud — and 
looked  up  to  see  blue  sky  out  the  hatch  and  water 
start  to  spill  over  the  doorsill.  Just  a  few  minutes 
before,  I  had  gone  over  egress  procedures  in  my 
mind  and  I  reacted  instinctively.  I  lifted  the  helmet 
from  my  head  and  dropped  it,  reached  for  the  right 
side  of  the  instrument  panel,  and  pulled  myself 
through  the  hatch. 

After  I  was  in  the  water  and  away  from  the  space- 
craft, I  noticed  a  line  from  the  dyemarker  can  over 
my  shoulder.  The  spacecraft  was  obviously  sinking 
and  I  was  concerned  that  I  might  be  pulled  down 
with  it.  I  freed  myself  from  the  line  and  noticed 
that  I  was  floating  with  mv  shoulders  above  water. 

The  helicopter  (fig.  7—7)  was  on  top  of  the  space- 
craft at  this  time  with  all  three  of  its  landing  gear 
in  the  water.  I  thought  the  copilot  was  having  dif- 
ficulty hooking  onto  the  spacecraft  and  I  swam  the 
4  or  5  feet  to  give  him  some  help.  Actually,  he  had 
cut  the  antennae  and  hooked  the  spacecraft  in  record 
time. 

The  helicopter  pulled  up  and  away  from  me  with 
tb-~  -oacecraft  and  I  saw  the  personal  sling  start 


down;  then  the  sling  was  pulled  back  into  the 
helicopter  and  it  started  to  move  away  from  me. 
At  this  time,  I  knew  that  a  second  helicopter  had 
been  assigned  to  pick  me  up,  so  I  started  to  swim 
away  from  the  primary  helicopter.  I  apparently  got 
caught  in  the  rotorwash  between  the  two  helicopters 
because  I  could  not  get  close  to  the  second  helicopter, 
even  though  I  could  see  the  copilot  in  the  door  with 
a  horsecollar  swinging  in  the  water.  I  finally 
reached  the  horsecollar  and  by  this  time,  I  was  get- 
ting quite  exhausted.  When  I  first  got  into  the 
water,  I  was  floating  quite  high  up:  I  would  say 
rmr  armpits  were  just  about  at  the  water  level.  But 
the  neck  dam  was  not  up  tight  and  I  had  forgotten 
to  lock  the  oxvgen  inlet  port:  so  the  air  was  gradu- 
ally seeping  out  of  my  suit.  Probably  the  most  air 
was  going  out  around  the  neck  dam,  but  I  could  see 
that  I  was  gradually  sinking  lower  and  lower  in 
the  water  and  was  having  a  difficult  time  staying 
afloat.  Before  the  copilot  finally  got  the  horse- 
collar to  me,  I  was  going  under  water  quite  often. 
The  mild  swells  we  were  having  were  breaking  over 
my  head  and  I  was  swallowing  some  salt  water.  As 
I  reached  the  horsecollar,  I  slipped  into  it  and  I 
knew  that  I  had  it  on  backwards  I  fig.  7—8)  ;  but  I 
gave  the  "up  '  signal  and  held  on  because  I  knew 
that  I  wasn't  likely  to  slip  out  of  the  sling.  As  soon 
as  I  got  into  the  helicopter,  mv  first  thought  was  to 
get  on  a  life  preserver  so  that  if  anything  happened 
to  the  helicopter,  I  wouldn't  have  another  ordeal 
in  the  water.  Shortly  after  this  time,  the  copilot 
informed  me  that  the  spacecraft  had  been  dropped 
as  a  result  of  an  engine  malfunction  in  the  primary 
helicopter. 

Postflight 

The  postflight  medical  examination  onboard  the 
carrier  was  brief  and  without  incident.  The  loss 
of  the  spacecraft  was  a  great  blow  to  me.  but  I  felt 
that  I  had  completed  the  flight  and  recoverv  with 
no  ill  effects. 

The  postflight  medical  debriefing  at  the  Grand 
Bahama  Island  installation  was  thorough  and  com- 
plete.   The  demands  on  me  were  not  unreasonable. 

Conclusions 

From  the  pilot's  point  of  view  the  conclusions 
reached  from  the  second  U.S.  manned  suborbital 
flight  are  as  follows: 

ll)  The  manual  proportional  control  system 
functioned  adequately  on  this  flight.  The  system  is 
capable  of  controlling  the  retrofire  accurately  and 


55 


Fiuure  7  7.  Helicopter  hovering  over  spacecraft. 


56 


safely.  The  roll  axis  is  underpowered  and  causes 
so  'ifticultv.  The  rate  command  system  func- 
t  erv  well  during  this  flight.    All  rates  were 

dai..,,».-d  satisfactorily,  and  it  is  easy  to  hold  and 
maintain  the  attitudes  with  the  rate  command  svs- 
tem.  If  the  rate  of  fuel  consumption  that  was  ex- 
perienced on  this  flight  is  true  in  all  cases,  it  would 
not  lie  advisable  to  use  the  rate  command  system 
during  ordinary  orbital  flight  to  control  attitudes. 
It  should  he  used  only  for  retrofire  and  reentry.  The 
autopilot  functioned  properly  with  the  possible  ex- 
ception of  the  5  seconds  of  damping  immediate!) 
after  separation.  This  period  is  so  brief  that  it  was 
impossible  to  determine  the  extent  of  any  damping. 
The  turnaround  maneuver  in  the  pitch  and  yaw  axes 
was  approximately  as  predicted,  but  the  roll  axis  was 
>low  to  respond. 

i2i  The  pilot's  best  friend  on  the  orbital  flight 
is  going  to  be  the  w  indow.  Out  this  window.  1  feel 
he  will  he  able  to  ascertain  accurately  his  position  at 
all  times.  I  ant  sure  he  will  be  able  to  see  stars  on 
the  dark  side  and  possibly  on  the  daylight  side,  with 


a  little  time  to  adapt  the  eves.  The  brighter  stars 
and  planets  will  certainly  be  v  isible. 

(  3  i  Spacecraft  rates  and  oscillations  are  very"  easy 
to  ascertain  bv  looking  at  the  horizon  and  ground 
checkpoints.  1  feel  that  drift  rates  will  be  easy  to 
distinguish  on  an  orbital  flight  when  there  is  time 
to  concentrate  on  specific  points  outside  the  window. 

(4  I  Sounds  of  pyrotechnics,  control  nozzles,  and 
control  solenoids  are  one  of  the  pilot  s  best  cues  as 
to  what  is  going  on  in  the  spacecraft  and  in  the 
sequencing.  The  sounds  of  posigrades.  retrorockets. 
and  mortar  firing  are  so  prominent  that  these  become 
the  primary  cues  that  the  event  has  occurred.  The 
spacecraft  telelight  panel  becomes  of  secondary  im- 
portance and  merely  foiifirm-  that  a  sequence  has 
happened  on  time.  The  sequence  panel's  main  value 
is  telling  the  pilot  when  an  event  should  have  oc- 
curred and  has  not. 

loi  Vibrations  throughout  the  flight  were  of  a 
low  order  and  were  not  disturbing.  The  buffeting  at 
maximum  dynamic  pressure  and  a  Mach  number  of 
1  on  launch  was  mild  and  did  not  interfere  with 


FlCL'RE  i-B.  Helicopter  recovering  pilot  i  horserollar  on  backwards) . 


pilot  functions.  Communications  and  vision  were 
satisfactory  throughout  this  period.  The  mild  buf- 
feting on  reentry  does  not  interfere  with  any  pilot 
functions. 

(6  I  Communications  throughout  the  flight  were 
satisfactory.     Contact  was  maintained  with  some 


facility  at  all  times.  There  was  never  any  require- 
ment to  repeat  a  transmission. 

(7i  During  the  flight,  all  spacecraft  sys  p- 
peared  to  function  properly.  There  was  no  1  v,., fire- 
men t  to  override  any  system.  Every  event  occurred 
on  time  and  as  planned. 


Reference 

1.  Slaytox,  Dotvald  K. :  Pilot  Training  and  I'rejiight  Preparation.     Proc.  Conf.  on  Results  of  the  First  U.S.  Manned 
Suborbital  Space  Fligh  ■,  NASA,  Nat.  Inst.  Health,  and  Nat.  Acad.  Sri.,  June  6,  1961,  j.p.  53-60. 


Table  7-1. — Flight  Plan 


rime,  Event 
min:sec 


0:01)         Li  ft -off 

0:30        Svstems  report 

1:00      ;  Svfrlems  rejtorl 

l:l.">        Cabin,  pressure  report 

1:30         Svstetiis  report 

2:00        Systems  report 

{Launch-vehicle  engine  cutoff 
Ti  over  jet  tison 
Relrojeltison  switch  to  OFF 
2:33        Spacecraft  separation  from  launch  vehicle 
2:38        Spacecraft  turnaround  to  flight  attitude 
on  autopilot 

3:00        Transfer  of  flight  control  from  autopilot 
to  manual  proportional  control  system, 
and  evaluation  of  system 
1:00      ;  Spacecraft  yawed  to0  to  left  using  horizon 

I       as  attitude  reference 
.1:10      :  Ketrograde  rockets  fired  manuallv 
Rrtrojettison  svstem  armed 
Transfer  of  flight  control  from  manual 
>:3.>  proportional    control    svstem    to  rate 

command  control  system 
Kadio  transmitter  switched  from   I  HI' 
to  IIF 

0:10         Rctropackage  jettison 

{Periscope  retracts  automatically 
Spacecraft  positioned  into  reentry  alti- 
tude 

7:00        Communications  switched  hack  lo  L  11  F 

I  ransmit  ler 
7:46        Reentry  starts 

(Drogue  parachute  deploys 
Snorkels  open 
Emergency  rate  oxygen  flow 
10:13         Main  parachute  deplovment 
l.">:37  Landing 


58 


J.  S  GOVERN MF!nT  PRIMING  OFFICE  ■  1961